• 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.

Eurogamer: Sony's live service pivot "may not pay off the way Jim Ryan had once hoped", says industry insider

My fear is that there are not games coming next year and that's why we've had no showcases showing off first party single player games. I can't help but think that Sony has shifted to Gaas far too much, far too quickly and I think Jim Ryan very well may have overestimated the impact that acquiring Bungie would have in helping transitioning studios into making games that fit a business model. Previously they just had to worry about making kick ass games.

Hopefully I'm wrong and my fears are entirely unfounded.

I don't think there's cause for concern. This year we had FF16 and SM2. And while that's not a TON of exclusives, they are big ones.

We get FF7:R early next year which looks fantastic. Death Stranding 2 has already been revealed, so a fall 2024 release wouldn't surprise me. I'm not sure if Sony will have much more than that in terms of big AAA exclusives. I just don't think any of their current studios are ready yet. They may be close to showing off/revealing games, but not releasing them.
 

ulantan

Member
My fear is that there are not games coming next year and that's why we've had no showcases showing off first party single player games. I can't help but think that Sony has shifted to Gaas far too much, far too quickly and I think Jim Ryan very well may have overestimated the impact that acquiring Bungie would have in helping transitioning studios into making games that fit a business model. Previously they just had to worry about making kick ass games.
The implication of that line of thought is that teams that teams that were previously working on single player games that were in production for 3+ years just stopped working and all moved to making gaas while simultaneously getting the budget for thier single player games increased. The more likely scenario is that restructuring after covid delayed everyone.
 
Jim Ryan is a marketing guy.

He doesn't design the PS5. He doesn't make the games. He honestly doesn't really understand any of that. He can re-direct strategy to GAAS, but his investments haven't been released yet so we can't judge him on that strategy.

What he does have direct immediate control over are mostly business items. He can set the price points, he can put together a marketing campaign, he can change the PS Plus plans, he can increase the price of PS Plus. Those are the levers Jim Ryan pulls and is in direct command of.

LOL, I think you fully misunderstand the role of a CEO.

His job is to make the calls on the direction of the organization. You think because he came up through product and marketing that is what he does as CEO?

Every major decision runs through the CEO and his executive team.
 
LOL, I think you fully misunderstand the role of a CEO.

His job is to make the calls on the direction of the organization. You think because he came up through product and marketing that is what he does as CEO?

Every major decision runs through the CEO and his executive team.

He makes major decisions. And the ones that truly matter take many years. PS5 was in development before PS4 pro even launched.

The only IMMEDIATE levers he can pull are mostly marketing/business related. So we shouldn't "crown" jim on the success of PS5, when he literally had nothing to do with its technical development. I suspect being a marketing guy, he just let Mark Cerny and team run with it and stay out otherwise. He can negotiate vendor pricing decisions and that's probably it
 

kaizenkko

Member
My fear is that there are not games coming next year and that's why we've had no showcases showing off first party single player games. I can't help but think that Sony has shifted to Gaas far too much, far too quickly and I think Jim Ryan very well may have overestimated the impact that acquiring Bungie would have in helping transitioning studios into making games that fit a business model. Previously they just had to worry about making kick ass games.

Hopefully I'm wrong and my fears are entirely unfounded.
Games take a big time to be done, especially these big AAA hig quality games that Sony is know for.

Studios like Guerrilla and Santa Monica have launch their big games in the last year, and Guerrilla still have launch Burning Shores DLC and Call of the Mountain. It's unrealistic to expect something from these studios right now.

Sucker Punch finished the work with Ghost of Tsushima only in 2021, with Director's Cut and Iki Islkand DLC, I really don't expect their next game to be release before 2026 at least.

Insomniac is close to release Spider-Man 2 and now they will be really start the work with Wolverine (a completly new IP, even them will take a more time to do this one).

Naughty Dog is probably the most perfecctionist PS studio, a new IP from them will be take 7/8 years to be done (maybe more). Hopefully they are working on multiple games, and helping other studios with the Uncharted reboot.

Bend is doing a new IP, it's not unrealistic think they will take 7/8 years to finish it.

Bluepoint, Asobi and Housemarque are really small studios, and Bluepoint have helped in GOW Ragnarok, there's nothing unusual with these guys.

There are always times when there are more or fewer games being released, what Sony has done since the launch of the PS5 has been simply incredible, but now we are going through a period of fewer releases and that is normal.
 
He makes major decisions. And the ones that truly matter take many years. PS5 was in development before PS4 pro even launched.

The only IMMEDIATE levers he can pull are mostly marketing/business related. So we shouldn't "crown" jim on the success of PS5, when he literally had nothing to do with its technical development. I suspect being a marketing guy, he just let Mark Cerny and team run with it and stay out otherwise. He can negotiate vendor pricing decisions and that's probably it

Hilarious that you think that.

Even the direction of things like going with an internal NVME solution rather than a plug and play would have been approved by leadership.

That you think he's personally negotiating with vendors over pricing but entirely removed from design decisions on hardware is absolutely hilarious.

You think Sony bought Bluepoint and Nixxes without his involvement?

The guy is involved in every major decision Sony makes and it's not just marketing decisions.
 

StueyDuck

Member
"Industry insider"...

So someone whose claim to fame is putting pronouns in their bio, forgive me for not taking their word as gospel 🤣

GaaS games are lame but this bozo knows nothing and is inside of nothing either 🤣
 
Hilarious that you think that.

Even the direction of things like going with an internal NVME solution rather than a plug and play would have been approved by leadership.

That you think he's personally negotiating with vendors over pricing but entirely removed from design decisions on hardware is absolutely hilarious.

You think Sony bought Bluepoint and Nixxes without his involvement?

The guy is involved in every major decision Sony makes and it's not just marketing decisions.

Approved is different than initiating. Mark Cerny initiated. Jim Ryan approved. He has no background in developing hardware, so he's going to trust the teams that made the PS4. It's not a difficult leap to think he was hands off and not responsible for it.

Getting Bluepoint and Nixes is fine, but he probably could have done a whole lot more especially when MS started aggressively escalating.

Being INVOLVED in major decisions is not the same thing as BEING RESPONSIBLE. As if the PS5 in its current state would look very different if only JIM BIG DICK RYAN wasn't the one signing off. That's just not reality.
 
It was honestly the worst-sounding pivot ever.

“We’re best known for our astoundingly high quality cinematic story-driven games, and so now as a priority we’re going to start transitioning our focus over to live-service games.”

Honestly I just really never got it, and still don’t. Been waiting for 2 years now to see the fruits of this gain any traction at all and haven’t seen anything come of it. But as a potential PS5 owner just waiting for a few more big single player first party games before I can justify a purchase, I gotta say it was a real head-scratcher.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
Games take a big time to be done, especially these big AAA hig quality games that Sony is know for.

Studios like Guerrilla and Santa Monica have launch their big games in the last year, and Guerrilla still have launch Burning Shores DLC and Call of the Mountain. It's unrealistic to expect something from these studios right now.

Sucker Punch finished the work with Ghost of Tsushima only in 2021, with Director's Cut and Iki Islkand DLC, I really don't expect their next game to be release before 2026 at least.

Insomniac is close to release Spider-Man 2 and now they will be really start the work with Wolverine (a completly new IP, even them will take a more time to do this one).

Naughty Dog is probably the most perfecctionist PS studio, a new IP from them will be take 7/8 years to be done (maybe more). Hopefully they are working on multiple games, and helping other studios with the Uncharted reboot.

Bend is doing a new IP, it's not unrealistic think they will take 7/8 years to finish it.

Bluepoint, Asobi and Housemarque are really small studios, and Bluepoint have helped in GOW Ragnarok, there's nothing unusual with these guys.

There are always times when there are more or fewer games being released, what Sony has done since the launch of the PS5 has been simply incredible, but now we are going through a period of fewer releases and that is normal.

So if you are right then my fears are confirmed and there are no games coming after Spider-man 2 for quite some time. Might as well sell my PS5 after SM 2 and hope/pray for a single player renaissance with PS5 Pro. Thank God for my PC.
 
Last edited:

ungalo

Member
It was honestly the worst-sounding pivot ever.

“We’re best known for our astoundingly high quality cinematic story-driven games, and so now as a priority we’re going to start transitioning our focus over to live-service games.”

Honestly I just really never got it, and still don’t. Been waiting for 2 years now to see the fruits of this gain any traction at all and haven’t seen anything come of it. But as a potential PS5 owner just waiting for a few more big single player first party games before I can justify a purchase, I gotta say it was a real head-scratcher.
you're talking like it's behind us
 

kaizenkko

Member
So if you are right then my fears are confirmed and there are no games coming after Spider-man 2 for quite some time. Might as well sell my PS5 after SM 2 and hope/pray for a single player renaissance with PS5 Pro. Thank God for my PC.
Stellar Blade, Death Stranding, Rise of the Ronin, FF VII Rebirth, etc. As always Sony is very dependent of second-party exclusives.
 
Last edited:

HeisenbergFX4

Gold Member
So if you are right then my fears are confirmed and there are no games coming after Spider-man 2 for quite some time. Might as well sell my PS5 after SM 2 and hope/pray for a single player renaissance with PS5 Pro. Thank God for my PC.
Just like I posted in the Jim Ryan retirement thread that I didn't like the way PS was trending (just like you say here) under his leadership

I honestly can see SM2 as my last PS5 exclusive game before the Pro as well and then wait for Wolverine as none of the other "2nd party" games really interest me
 

Bernardougf

Member
And console warriors like yourself can beat each other off to those numbers because I don't give 2 shits about how many consoles are sold.

What I do care about is what my games look like and for people like me chasing GAAS isn't worth it

Look at their first party output this last year and what we have to look forward to next year

Your precious PS brand can sell 200 million PS6s but if they chase GAAS and I keep getting 1 maybe 2 big budget 1st party games that Sony has become great at (for me) I wont be one buying the PS6 as I will have no use for it
Perfect post.
 

Bernardougf

Member
Just like I posted in the Jim Ryan retirement thread that I didn't like the way PS was trending (just like you say here) under his leadership

I honestly can see SM2 as my last PS5 exclusive game before the Pro as well and then wait for Wolverine as none of the other "2nd party" games really interest me
If this is the trend Ill not be getting the ps5pro
.. ill jump back to PC something I really didnt wanted to do.. but there is no point in staying closed on the playstation system if I can get the ONE/TWO game they release on pc down the line
 

Bernardougf

Member
My fear is that there are not games coming next year and that's why we've had no showcases showing off first party single player games. I can't help but think that Sony has shifted to Gaas far too much, far too quickly and I think Jim Ryan very well may have overestimated the impact that acquiring Bungie would have in helping transitioning studios into making games that fit a business model. Previously they just had to worry about making kick ass games.

Hopefully I'm wrong and my fears are entirely unfounded.
Thats the problem, your fear as mine is based on information and facts provided by Jim and sony thenselfs, including their showcase and lineup confirmed (until now). But people want you to dismiss all this based on ZERO concrete information and only hopes and dreams that something is on the horizon on a 4D chess move.
 
Approved is different than initiating. Mark Cerny initiated. Jim Ryan approved. He has no background in developing hardware, so he's going to trust the teams that made the PS4. It's not a difficult leap to think he was hands off and not responsible for it.

Getting Bluepoint and Nixes is fine, but he probably could have done a whole lot more especially when MS started aggressively escalating.

Being INVOLVED in major decisions is not the same thing as BEING RESPONSIBLE. As if the PS5 in its current state would look very different if only JIM BIG DICK RYAN wasn't the one signing off. That's just not reality.

Approving is actually what leadership does. It's the difference between going with a digital and non digital sku and going with two disparate hardware skus. It's the difference between having an NVME in the system to an external plug in unit. Engineers would give both options and pros and cons.

Sony has been making decisions that dollar for dollar far outweigh anything Microsoft has done with significantly more resources.

Why you think the CEOs job is to design hardware or make games is beyond me.
 

Audiophile

Member
What's annoying is that even as a primarily single player type who prefers more focused, self-contained experiences. Before they ever became a thing, I thought the whole GAAS concept would be great for very specific games that suited it and if done the right way. I still believe this, but the entire concept was hijacked by greedy bullshit. Ongoing expansive, developing worlds with player economies and so on.. Then when it all started happening we got glorified gambling and game bundles that cost £15-20 for a few gun skins and a character skin; some services just get dumped out with potato visuals and the tech barely even gets updated. I once thought of every aspect of these game evolving and getting better, nope, but you can buy animated lava skin for your M4A1!
 

Topher

Gold Member
Stellar Blade, Death Stranding, Rise of the Ronin, FF VII Rebirth, etc. As always Sony is very dependent of second-party exclusives.

That's fine, but I buy PlayStation for Sony's first party.

Thats the problem, your fear as mine is based on information and facts provided by Jim and sony thenselfs, including their showcase and lineup confirmed (until now). But people want you to dismiss all this based on ZERO concrete information and only hopes and dreams that something is on the horizon on a 4D chess move.

Exactly. I said previously that my hype level for PlayStation is at an all-time low. Sony started out great, but that momentum has fallen off and when I see all the focus and talk on Gaas coming from messaging to investors and in the one "showcase" we received the last two years the more I have cause for concern.
 

Zathalus

Member
I don't think there's cause for concern. This year we had FF16 and SM2. And while that's not a TON of exclusives, they are big ones.

We get FF7:R early next year which looks fantastic. Death Stranding 2 has already been revealed, so a fall 2024 release wouldn't surprise me. I'm not sure if Sony will have much more than that in terms of big AAA exclusives. I just don't think any of their current studios are ready yet. They may be close to showing off/revealing games, but not releasing them.
Of the games you mentioned only SM2 is first party. That and Wolverine seems to be it for 2023 and 2024 for Sony first party which is concerning.

Hopefully some amazing AAA single player games are in the works for next year, but the heavy focus on GaaS has me concerned.
 
Approving is actually what leadership does. It's the difference between going with a digital and non digital sku and going with two disparate hardware skus. It's the difference between having an NVME in the system to an external plug in unit. Engineers would give both options and pros and cons.

Sony has been making decisions that dollar for dollar far outweigh anything Microsoft has done with significantly more resources.

Why you think the CEOs job is to design hardware or make games is beyond me.

And Sony historically has been very price conscious. Delivering most power for least cost. This is largely a technical engineering constraint. Sony recognizes its own history with PS3 being 599 USD.

The decisions you credit Jim Ryan for really aren't his. They were obvious choices.

The only thing to credit Jim Ryan for specifically are the business changes: Price hikes on PS5, plan changes for PS plus, GaaS investments, and recently price hikes for PS plus.
 
Of the games you mentioned only SM2 is first party. That and Wolverine seems to be it for 2023 and 2024 for Sony first party which is concerning.

Hopefully some amazing AAA single player games are in the works for next year, but the heavy focus on GaaS has me concerned.

I don't distinguish between 2nd/3rd party exclusives and 1st party exclusives. They are the same thing at the end of the day, exclusives
 

Zathalus

Member
I don't distinguish between 2nd/3rd party exclusives and 1st party exclusives. They are the same thing at the end of the day, exclusives
I don't care about exclusives, I own everything so playing the games is not a problem. I care about what Sony themselves are working on and how the GaaS push is impacting thier studios.
 
I don't care about exclusives, I own everything so playing the games is not a problem. I care about what Sony themselves are working on and how the GaaS push is impacting thier studios.

Games take long to make these days. That's just how it is.

  • Bend, Sucker Punch, Naughty Dog all released games 3-4 years ago. Dev cycles are now 5+. Bend had a rough transition too, so I would not expect anything in 2024 from any of these studios.
  • Guerilla released a game in 2021, so they're out.
  • Santa Monica released a game in 2022, so they're out...but they could release a DLC type expansion.
  • Insomniac is releasing SM2 this year, Wolverine is probably late 2025

I think we'll get SOMETHING in 2024, probably a Bluepoint game (maybe, unless it's a massive departure from them), and I would expect Team Asobi to have an Astro's game or similar.
 
you're talking like it's behind us

Wishful thinking ;)

They’ll find out the hard way, one way or the other 🤷‍♂️, that nobody gives a shit about their pivot and most AAA gamers are sick of live service games and don’t want them.

They need to double down on what made PS4 so great, not look in the other direction. Give me Ghost of Tsushima 2 and knock it the fuck out of the park. Then I’ll plunk down $500 for a PS5 once there’s a slimmer, sleeker model. The giant vertical router look is a huge eye sore.
 
Last edited:

kaizenkko

Member
Of the games you mentioned only SM2 is first party. That and Wolverine seems to be it for 2023 and 2024 for Sony first party which is concerning.

Hopefully some amazing AAA single player games are in the works for next year, but the heavy focus on GaaS has me concerned.
First-party Playstation games by year (not counting remasters):

2014: Infamous Second Son, Driveclub (2 games)
2015: 0 releases
2016: Uncharted 4 (1 game)
2017: Horizon Zero Dawn, Uncharted Lost Legacy, Gravity Rush 2 (3 games)
2018: God of War (1 game)

Games like Bloodborne, The Last Guardian, Detroit Became Human and Spider-Man was all made by third-party studios (at that time, Insomniac was third), but the point is: Spider-Man 2 as the only first-party game release in 2023 is not a little different of what Sony does in many other years.
 

kaizenkko

Member
That's fine, but I buy PlayStation for Sony's first party.
If you are fine with PS4's release schedule, so you should be fine with PS5's. As I said in my last post, things are exactly the same as use to be.

By some reason people are acting like Sony have always release a extreme amount of first-party titles for year.
 

HeisenbergFX4

Gold Member
You can't have an AAAs with no GAAS. Conversely there's no GAAS without an AAAs.

Why can't we have both?
I have no problem with getting both

Problem is it sure feels like the last 12 months and the next 12 months (that we know of) are pretty light on AAA single player titles that many of us have come to love from Sony

Has this come at the expense of chasing GAAS?

Iron Man Idk GIF by GQ
 

lh032

I cry about Xbox and hate PlayStation.
I like how people said Playstation should stay away from GaaS, while cheering for Microsoft acquisition of Acti/Blizz, which pwned bunch of GaaS games.
 

Raonak

Banned
None of the GaaS games have even come out yet.
Calling it a failure seems a bit premature.

Especially when we had Horizon, GT7 and GOW all come out last year.
 

Topher

Gold Member
If you are fine with PS4's release schedule, so you should be fine with PS5's. As I said in my last post, things are exactly the same as use to be.

By some reason people are acting like Sony have always release a extreme amount of first-party titles for year.

Not really. 2015 was considered a light year with Bloodborne, but there wasn't a situation where we had no idea what was coming at all since we still had annual E3s. We had R&C and Uncharted 4 in 2016. HZD and Uncharted Lost Legacy in 2017. We had gems like The Last Guardian (2016) and Everybody's Golf (2017) as well. As of now, after Spider-man 2, we know of Wolverine coming.....sometime. That's it for first party. To me, the fact we know nothing about what is coming is concerning. It was not like this during PS4.

First-party Playstation games by year (not counting remasters):

2014: Infamous Second Son, Driveclub (2 games)
2015: 0 releases
2016: Uncharted 4 (1 game)
2017: Horizon Zero Dawn, Uncharted Lost Legacy, Gravity Rush 2 (3 games)
2018: God of War (1 game)

Games like Bloodborne, The Last Guardian, Detroit Became Human and Spider-Man was all made by third-party studios (at that time, Insomniac was third), but the point is: Spider-Man 2 as the only first-party game release in 2023 is not a little different of what Sony does in many other years.

Correction:

2014: Infamous Second Son, Driveclub, Infamous First Light
2015: Bloodborne
2016: Uncharted 4, Ratchet and Clank, The Last Guardian, MLB The Show 16
2017: Horizon Zero Dawn, Uncharted Lost Legacy, Gravity Rush 2, Everybody's Golf, Knack 2, MLB The Show 17.
2018: God of War, Spider-man

Games funded and published by Sony are first party games regardless of the studio that made them. Don't know if that is fully the case with Stellar Blade or Rise of the Ronin although Sony is publishing both. There is also the question of who owns the IP.
 
Last edited:

kaizenkko

Member
Games paid for and published by Sony are first party games regardless of the studio that made them.
You just think this way to make your point. lol

But yeah, Sony don't ANNOUNCE games as before, I don't like it either, but there's no sense presume they just stop to make single player games.
 

Topher

Gold Member
You just think this way to make your point. lol

Nope. This is just how the industry is....



But yeah, Sony don't ANNOUNCE games as before, I don't like it either, but there's no sense presume they just stop to make single player games.

Not presuming anything. I just have no information at all. That's the problem. Hopefully that will change with the new leadership.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Writes a lot, says very little
The problem for Sony is deciding to establish this so late and was it the right move for every developer?

Who knows.

It hasn’t turned out well for Deviation Games, Naughty Dog (yet),

Doubt. A timeline exist to when gamers will stop playing online? What is too late?

People don’t even know what Fairgame$ will play like, but already hate the concept based on the trailer feedback.

People also hated the trailer to many Call Of Duties and watched them move record units. I can't use trailer feedback as some indication of how a fucking game is going to do. The majority are not on here talking about shit man, its why most on here will talk shit about Madden, Fifa, Call Of Duty and then wonder how and why its moving records units or something.

I simply can't use that as any real evidence of anything.
 

Barakov

Member
I have no problem with getting both

Problem is it sure feels like the last 12 months and the next 12 months (that we know of) are pretty light on AAA single player titles that many of us have come to love from Sony

Has this come at the expense of chasing GAAS?

Iron Man Idk GIF by GQ
It wouldn't surprise me. It seems like you have to plan pretty far ahead when developing GAAS. Devs probably need that buffer when putting out seasonal content so they don't have a season end and then delay the next season to a undetermined date. Halo Infinite is the biggest poster child for this. That game came out and garnered a bunch of good will and brought a lot of people back and then 343 dropped the ball. The "Hey everyone, give us some time" excuse doesn't work. Especially when there are so many options out there.

The fact that Sony is developing a couple of these things means that their other games could suffer. Hard to say though, given how tight lipped they currently are about their plans for '24.
 
Last edited:

mcjmetroid

Member
It's a stupid idea in general.
" let's make the same games everyone else is making nearly 10 years after they did.."
What a great idea. And such great forward thinking.

Sony's strength as a first party used to be to supply games that nobody else did to help enhance their console library. Single player story driven games is what their strengths are. Nobody does this better than them and they made tons of money off them.

If you want to make even more money in this cynical coperate world then they already are. The shows like the last of us and uncharted to a lesser proves there is an insane amount of value on this games.

These live service games are a mistake from Sony. A terrible direction that will cost them good will with people for a while.

Basically Sony should be doing what Nintendo is doing but with more powerful hardware and focus on story driven games. Stick to your strengths.
 

sachos

Member
I too fear about their GaaS future, i have a bad feeling it won't end well. I agree with Shawn Layden about AAA costs balooning out of control though, i would love to see Sony do some kind of experiment: Keep making their big budget AAA games but also put aside smaller teams and give them a smaller budget and make them do highly replayable 10hrs~ games. Sell them at 50 usd. 2 years dev cycle, iterate fast.
By "highly replayable" i mean interesting having interesting NG+ modes, like say RE4 were you can keep unlocking weapons or upgrades. Chase that RE style of highly adictive gameplay focused replayability.
 
Last edited:

mcjmetroid

Member
I have no problem with getting both

Problem is it sure feels like the last 12 months and the next 12 months (that we know of) are pretty light on AAA single player titles that many of us have come to love from Sony

Has this come at the expense of chasing GAAS?

Iron Man Idk GIF by GQ
100% it is. Those saying it isn't are in denial. It's clear even going on their direct last year what their focus was. Isn't naughty dog working an a multiplayer game and guerilla games working on multiplayer horizon? These teams should be working on new single player IPs and would be in previous generations.

It reminds me of the denial of Nintendo fans during the Wii era saying both casual and core games were being given equal attention when it was clear their priorities had switched to the casual market.

Let's see if they can balance both types of games but are playstation known for this? Not to mention further splitting their effort developing games for PSVR2.
 

EDMIX

Writes a lot, says very little
It's clear even going on their direct last year what their focus was. Isn't naughty dog working an a multiplayer game and guerilla games working on multiplayer horizon?

That doesn't mean they have no single player gamers being made sir.

Pushing a direction of GAAS based on their latest purchases is based on getting a return on that investment, it is not an arguement that they are no longer doing single player or something. They also have directs where they focus on VR, is that to say we should worry about EVER getting normal single player games? Then be like "derrr isn't Guerilla worked on da VR GAME" SHOCK FACE lol

it seeks too much to force this absolute with zero context.

Naughty Dog is several teams, 2 of which are making single player games, that same fucking part of their team that is doing a MP game, also did MP on The Last Of Us on PS3 and Uncharted etc, using your logic, their focus has been this for 10 plus years if not longer....

Guerilla Games is also several teams, not 1. They literally started Shell Shock and Killzone, games with multiplayer, so a part of their team doing a Horizon MP, doesn't mean you get zero Horizon 3 or something. I see no evidence they would not have a balance as why even buy teams that focus on MP, if the goal wasn't to have them focus on that while their other teams continue to focus on single player concepts?

So no disrespect, but its clear a lot of that information was left out to force a narrative to argue...

They'll be just fine.
 
Last edited:

Raonak

Banned
100% it is. Those saying it isn't are in denial. It's clear even going on their direct last year what their focus was. Isn't naughty dog working an a multiplayer game and guerilla games working on multiplayer horizon? These teams should be working on new single player IPs and would be in previous generations.

It reminds me of the denial of Nintendo fans during the Wii era saying both casual and core games were being given equal attention when it was clear their priorities had switched to the casual market.

Let's see if they can balance both types of games but are playstation known for this? Not to mention further splitting their effort developing games for PSVR2.
Completely missing the fact that these development studios have grown in size and have multiple teams now.

Naughty dog are already confirmed to be working on multiple projects. And It's likely guerilla are too.
 

Crayon

Member
100% it is. Those saying it isn't are in denial. It's clear even going on their direct last year what their focus was. Isn't naughty dog working an a multiplayer game and guerilla games working on multiplayer horizon? These teams should be working on new single player IPs and would be in previous generations.

It reminds me of the denial of Nintendo fans during the Wii era saying both casual and core games were being given equal attention when it was clear their priorities had switched to the casual market.

Let's see if they can balance both types of games but are playstation known for this? Not to mention further splitting their effort developing games for PSVR2.

Already mentioned a post up, but there are a lot of people at these studios. The chart where they added investment for gaas was just as likely related to spending to expand the studios. It also makes sense that they would be buying companies we never heard of for their technical support.

My point is, any speculation here is far from 100% sure to be happening. They want to get money from gaas. Maybe they are doing it in a smart way or a stupid way. We don't know yet.
 
And Sony historically has been very price conscious. Delivering most power for least cost. This is largely a technical engineering constraint. Sony recognizes its own history with PS3 being 599 USD.

The decisions you credit Jim Ryan for really aren't his. They were obvious choices.

The only thing to credit Jim Ryan for specifically are the business changes: Price hikes on PS5, plan changes for PS plus, GaaS investments, and recently price hikes for PS plus.

They weren't obvious choices. Phil Spencer didn't make that choice. When the choice was initially announced Sony got major flack for having to open up the system to install the drive.

It wasn't the obvious choice until the massive cost savings became clear and abundant.

You only want to credit Jim Ryan for things that you don't approve of and your bias is pretty clear as day.
 
Naughty Dog only did platform games, then they did a cart racing game. They went back to platformers but in a more 3d space, then they made another cart racing game. Then they went on to create 3d third person shooters in the action adventure space. Then the shifted to do action horror.

Naughty Dog has been reinventing themselves for decades now, but people want to get their panties in a bunch because they do a multiplayer game?
 

Raonak

Banned
Naughty Dog only did platform games, then they did a cart racing game. They went back to platformers but in a more 3d space, then they made another cart racing game. Then they went on to create 3d third person shooters in the action adventure space. Then the shifted to do action horror.

Naughty Dog has been reinventing themselves for decades now, but people want to get their panties in a bunch because they do a multiplayer game?
The funny thing is, when they actually do online, it rocks - Uncharted 2 online and TLOU factions were both AMAZING
 
They weren't obvious choices. Phil Spencer didn't make that choice

Phil Spencer is desperate and made desperate moves. It is unprecedented what he did by launching two tiers of consoles

Sony’s PS5 strategy is the same as what’s been used before previously

I’m neutral on Jim Ryan, I think he’s mostly a suit that didn’t make any major mistakes, but his legacy won’t be fondly remembered because he made many anti consumer moves and switched to a GaaS focus
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom