• 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.

Shuhei Yoshida: "We believe in the premium release of a title" before subscriptions

Lognor

Banned
Ethusiasts tend to enjoy and value ownership. It tends to be important to them. I'll take it a step further, people who are serious enthusiasts tend to enjoy physical ownership (we have those people on this very forum), they won't even touch digital due to the nature of digital licenses. A similar phenomenon is happening in the home movie/entertainment industry (including music). Netflix (and streaming in general) is for casuals who aren't overly concerned about the quality of their experience whereas those who are real enthusiasts will purchase physical media and all the hardware necessary to get the most out of the experience.
This is a really bad argument in your part. Your trying to gate keep what makes someone an enthusiastic? Really?

Even your argument against Netflix is weak as fuck.

Really think about what you typed there. I can understand that YOU want to own your movies, your games, your music, etc. But that is NOT what makes someone an enthusiastic. Why do I even need to say this? Such a weird take on your part.

So a cinephile that goes to see movies every week in a theater is not actually an enthusiasts because they don't own the films? And if they do own the them, but own them digitally they're less of an enthusiast than someone that owns the bluray? Yikes. Seriously, think about what you wrote. Bizarre take.
 

Amiga

Member
If anyone believes this, I have a bridge to sell you. No one thought Sony would start releasing their games to PC either. Nobody thought Sony would step up to start offering a bunch of their first party games for free as part of a catalog in a subscription service in addition to cutting deals to bring even third party AAA games to that catalog. They initially resisted EA Play also before they relented on that.

Soon they'll do console and PC day and date releases. And eventually they will also end up releasing their biggest first party games day one on PS Plus. It's only a matter of how soon will they be forced to do so.

If there is better value in it, Sony would surly do it. Why wouldn't they. staggered releases for different markets seems the best way to do it now. If revenue projections change for MS they will also switch to single premium releases.
 
Proof my man. Show the proof of the lower game quality. Prove it isn't sustainable. Show how MS has muscled out competition from '3rd place' which people keep repeating. You'd think the 3rd place company would be simply ignored.

What I am concerned about is higher console and game prices. Who has risen both of these recently? MS? When game quality goes down and prices go up on Game pass then people can complain but right now neither of those things are happening so all the concern is unsubstantiated.

I'm not saying a drop in quality is what is happening right now. lol. My concern is for the future. So of course I have zero proof. Just a concern.
Your concern of prices going up is a valid concern as well. I understand that.
 

Menzies

Banned
It's fine, you don't care about your gaming library (or even care to have one by the looks of things) and I do. You don't care about what games you have access to, I do. I like to decide exactly which developers and publishers get my money, you don't.

You're free to identify as an "enthusiast" all you want though. It's 2022, everyone is free to be whatever they believe.
I believe you and I have different gaming budgets or disposable incomes. I still buy all the platforms (except VR, not interested) and the games on the other platforms I'm interested in, mainly because they don't offer a comparable service.

In most circles I fit the grade. If one person spends twice the amount of time every week playing, against the person spending twice owning, who's the enthusiast?
 

Kacho

Member
Yeah this is the smartest move for them. Xbox is only being as aggressive as they are because they’re positioning themselves as a Game Pass + streaming service. That’s the only only reason Nutella kept them around. He’s all about streaming and services.

Game Pass won’t elevate Xbox to the level of a Sony, Nintendo or Steam because core gamers value some semblance of ownership and a vast catalog of games, something Xbox continues to struggle with. PC Game Pass remains an afterthought for the most part.
 

Lognor

Banned
For a publisher with mostly SP games that can be completed rather quickly and wouldn't warrant subscriptions for longer than a month at a time that's probably a healthy mindset. I know I'll never spent more on a SP game that's on GP than what a month costs... So 1-15€ vs 80€. That's 65+€ less in the publisher's pocket from my side per game.
I played H:I and Gears 5 for 1€.... That simply can't be good for the developer.
No, it's not but you are in the really small minority of people that do that. Most will stay subscribed long term, even when they stop using the service! That's why so many companies are moving to subscription services. People aren't likely to cancel. Regular stream of income every month.
 

GHG

Member
This is a really bad argument in your part. Your trying to gate keep what makes someone an enthusiastic? Really?

Even your argument against Netflix is weak as fuck.

Really think about what you typed there. I can understand that YOU want to own your movies, your games, your music, etc. But that is NOT what makes someone an enthusiastic. Why do I even need to say this? Such a weird take on your part.

So a cinephile that goes to see movies every week in a theater is not actually an enthusiasts because they don't own the films? And if they do own the them, but own them digitally they're less of an enthusiast than someone that owns the bluray? Yikes. Seriously, think about what you wrote. Bizarre take.

There are different tiers to everything.

If you're going to argue that someone who has a physical collection of ultra-HD blu rays, a complete home cinema system with a projector and 7+ surround reference quality sound speakers is the same as your average joe who just plops on the sofa and watches his movies via netflix on an uncalibrated HD TV then I'd tell you you're wrong.

As far as movies go theres physical media (at differing tiers), Kaleidescape, digital downloads and digital streaming (it gets messy here because the streaming services and even the devices used to stream make a difference). All of those options suit different types of customer.

There is a distinct difference between someone who is simply a fan of their hobby and someone who is an enthusiast. One visit to avforums will show you the gulf between different people. The same thing applys in gaming. We have some legit enthusiasts here and we have some people who claim to be but aren't (actions and attitudes speak volumes). It's not about gatekeeping, it's the reality of the situation.

The ultimate litmus test is how individuals react when you take the content they need for their hobby away from them, hence most people who are completely and utterly serious about it will prefer physical media over anything else - simply because just the thought of them no longer having access makes them uneasy.

It's not an exact science, nothing like this is but it would be disingenuous to suggest everyone is the same just because they get involved in some way shape or form.

So many blanket statements and veiled insults it’s ridiculous.

I don’t think being an enthusiast and having a collector mindset are the same thing, and I think people who play a lot and enjoy a variety of genres find more value in subs compared to casual players. If you complete 40+ games a year it makes a lot more sense than if you buy the 3 big AAA coming out every year.

Not to mention enthusiasts are more likely to be playing on PC where physical ownership isn’t even an option anymore.

Let me put it this way, I struggle to see how someone who claims to be an "enthusiast" would be against those who care about ownership and the overall health of the industry that oversees their hobby. A lot of these discussions boil down to "fuck you, I get cheap access to games, don't care about anything else". It's all good until it's not.
 
Last edited:
I'm not saying a drop in quality is what is happening right now. lol. My concern is for the future. So of course I have zero proof. Just a concern.
Your concern of prices going up is a valid concern as well. I understand that.
I tend to be more worried about what is actually happening than what COULD happen. It's totally possible Game pass will go up in price and all the games on it will suddenly be horrible but it doesn't seem very likely. If MS can't find a way to make money on it then the service will end and gamers will go elsewhere. The issues over making a profit is MS' concern, my concern is that I get a good value for my money and on that no one can credibly argue Game pass is a bad value.
 

Lognor

Banned
There are different tiers to everything.

If you're going to argue that someone who has a physical collection of ultra-HD blu rays, a complete home cinema system with a projector and 7+ surround reference quality sound speakers is the same as your average joe who just plops on the sofa and watches his movies via netflix on an uncalibrated HD TV then I'd tell you you're wrong.

As far as movies go theres physical media (at differing tiers), Kaleidescape, digital downloads and digital streaming (it gets messy here because the streaming services and even the devices used to stream make a difference). All of those options suit different types of customer.

There is a distinct difference between someone who is simply a fan of their hobby and someone who is an enthusiast. One visit to avforums will show you the gulf between different people. The same thing applys in gaming. We have some legit enthusiasts here and we have some people who claim to be but aren't. It's not about gatekeeping, it's the reality of the situation.

The ultimate litmus test is how individuals react when you take the content they need for their hobby away from them, hence most people who are completely and utterly serious about it will prefer physical media over anything else - simply because just the thought of them no longer having access makes them uneasy.

It's not an exact science, nothing like this is but it would be disingenuous to suggest everyone is the same just because they get involved in some way shape or form.
As another poster already pointed out, you're talking about collectors, not enthusiasts. There's a difference.

An enthusiast is someone who has a significant interest in something. That's it. Has nothing to do with ownership. That's a collector. You may relate to being an enthusiast because you collect games. That's not every enthusiast.

And I just have to laugh at the bolded part of your post. No, you're not trying to gate keep at all. Lol jfc

And btw, I game mostly on game pass and I AM an enthusiast. I do buy switch games but I sell them after beating them. I'm an enthusiast, not a collector. What are you? Sounds like a collector to me.
 
Last edited:

Lognor

Banned
I tend to be more worried about what is actually happening than what COULD happen. It's totally possible Game pass will go up in price and all the games on it will suddenly be horrible but it doesn't seem very likely. If MS can't find a way to make money on it then the service will end and gamers will go elsewhere. The issues over making a profit is MS' concern, my concern is that I get a good value for my money and on that no one can credibly argue Game pass is a bad value.
I just had to look it up and game pass started over FIVE YEARS AGO! And there hasn't been a drop in quality, at all. In fact, probably the opposite!

Ten years from now FalsettoVibe FalsettoVibe will still be very concerned that there will be a drop in quality. Any day now...
 
It was announced and released years before Game Pass existed.

Sony started to to this back in 2010 with the release of PS Plus. As I remember it also did have time limited game trials, PS1 and PSP games back then btw.

Later they released a game subscription with a catalog of hundreds of games, before MS did it. And cloud gaming service targeting first console but also other devices announcing day one that down the road it would reach mobile and PC too, also before MS did it.

But Sony won't include their AAA games on the service day one because it's a suicidal financial move and they already have other strategy instead that it's super profitable and is generating them the biggest amount of yearly revenue than any console maker ever did in gaming history.

It would be dumb to give away the exclusives that are selling over 10 or 20 million copies.


Sony said multiple times they don't plan to do this, and shown a graph with their scheduled releases for each platform for the current fiscal year and the fiscal year that ends in 2026. For both years they had a total of zero PS+PC release, when there was a PS4+PS5 group separated of the PS5 group.

Did you just say PS Now was Sony's Game Pass and was released years before Game Pass existed? Time to put you in the time machine. :)

the_north_remembers_stone_wallpaper__version_2__by_luckyraptor_dbfit7f-fullview.jpg


PS Now started out in the 2014 beta as rentals starting at 4 hours to try a game along with 7 day, 30 day and 90 day options. $2.99 for four hours, $5.99 for seven days, $7.99 for 30 days and $14.99 for 90 days.

PS Now officially launched in 2015 at $19.99 per month or $44.99 every 3 months, for streaming alone, no ability to download actual games to your console.

Launch Trailer.



And it was all streaming, zero ability to download and play the games natively on your console. It started first with ps3 game streaming. PS4 game streaming didn't happen until 3 years later in 2017.

When did Sony finally start allowing you to download games to play on your console the way Game Pass does? 2 years after Game Pass was already doing it. Sony finally did it in 2019, one year before the launch of the PS5.

https://blog.playstation.com/2019/10/01/playstation-now-everything-you-need-to-know/

And, coincidence, they finally dropped the price of PS Now from $19.99 per month down to $9.99 per month after 2 years of Game Pass being on the scene. That's the pressure of Game Pass having a direct impact. Game Pass took 3 years to reach 10 million subscribers. Meanwhile, PS Now after being out since 2015, still only had 2.2 million as of 2020. It's important people realize just how much competition from Game Pass forced Sony to up their offering to their own customers. People need to be thankful for Game Pass, I know I am. PS Plus right now on PS5 is significantly better than anything Sony was ever doing before, and none of that happens without Game Pass. Notice when Sony dropped their largest and best list of native download games onto PS Plus for free with the subscription? The launch of the PS5. That's when the PS Plus Collection came about. Monthly games here or there prior to that was no game pass competitor, neither was the inferior PS Now.



You said Sony don't plan on doing day and date PC releases? Wanna bet? Bungie is definitely going to do it, which means that's Sony doing it. Bungie is releasing on all platforms, remember? I fully expect
 

BeardGawd

Banned
Good. This is the only way to guarantee quality first party games. Look at Nintendo and Sony offerings/their approach.. Then look at Microsofts offerings and their approach.
Are Bethesda games less premium vs Sony and Nintendo games? Will Starfield be any less epic for being Day 1 on Game Pass on both Xbox and PC?
 

GHG

Member
As another poster already pointed out, you're talking about collectors, not enthusiasts. There's a difference.

An enthusiast is someone who has a significant interest in something. That's it. Has nothing to do with ownership. That's a collector. You may relate to being an enthusiast because you collect games. That's not every enthusiast.

And I just have to laugh at the bolded part of your post. No, you're not trying to gate keep at all. Lol jfc

And btw, I game mostly on game pass and I AM an enthusiast. I do buy switch games but I sell them after beating them. I'm an enthusiast, not a collector. What are you? Sounds like a collector to me.

I'm not a collector, that's for sure. I haven't purchased physical in over 4 years.

However if someone had all the games I have digitally in physical form turned round to me and said I'm not an enthusiast based on their criteria I'm not questioning it. Just like how I can't relate to anyone who would limit their gaming to what happens to appear on a digital rental subscription, at that point you're not even in control of how you spend your time with your hobby.

Like I said, different tiers.
 
Last edited:

sainraja

Member
They might not be saying it but they are most likely exploring all options — they just aren't betting on "subscription" model that involves first party day one — I am sure they have looked at how much it could cost them to match what MS is doing (the biggest titles MS has released so far has been Halo Infinite and Forza Horizon 5 from first-party).
 

CamHostage

Member
First you must find out if these games were always meant to release on PS4 regardless of if there was a PS5 or not.

The mere fact there is a PS5, means they believe in generations.

Jim Ryan said, "We believe in generations" just a few months before Sony quietly confirmed that three of its planned launch titles were cross-gen with PS5 and PS4 (and Horizon was confirmed cross-gen the same day the game was announced, same with Spidey and Sackboy; Gran Turismo may have been a late choice to port down, according to some rumors but probably we'll never know for sure.)

So, okay, I guess maybe those beliefs held strong for 4 whole months?

Also, knock it off with your circular logic that them making a new box means they believed in making a new box. People understand new hardware is meant to deliver on new expectations. This gen has been frustratingly slow to deliver what elitists might call "true next-gen" (although in terms of play speed and cool controller features, this generation genuinely arrived), and we can debate about whether cross-gen has actually been an anchor on these first few years of games or if it's just a matter of the state of the industry and technology that next-gen exclusives aren't kicking ass like past gens, but nobody is looking at the current slate of PS5 and Xbox Series titles and considering them to be Mission Accomplished.
 
Last edited:

Kacho

Member
They might not be saying it but they are most likely exploring all options — they just aren't betting on "subscription" model that involves first party day one — I am sure they have looked at how much it could cost them to match what MS is doing (the biggest titles MS has released so far has been Halo Infinite and Forza Horizon 5 from first-party).
I think day one for Sony titles makes sense for their upcoming GaaS offerings, but the core single player experiences? No chance.
 

consoul

Member
Like Stray which went to subscription service on day 1 and launched as a boxed product two months later.

Uh wait a sec...
 

Menzies

Banned
I'm not a collector, that's for sure. I haven't purchased physical in over 4 years.

However if someone had all the games I have digitally in physical form turned round to me and said I'm not an enthusiast based on their criteria I'm not questioning it. Just like how I can't relate to anyone who would limit their gaming to what happens to appear on a digital rental subscription, at that point you're not even in control of how you spend your time with your hobby.

Like I said, different tiers.
If you're referencing me, you're making a lot of assumptions that have no baring in reality.

As I said I own all the platforms and purchase games I'm interested in, I'm not however, going to purchase things I already have / soon will have access to.

One day I'll aspire to such greatness of double dipping and owning things I can already play. That will be the day I can truly say, I enjoy video games.
 

Stooky

Member
I've said it before, I'll say it again. It's leading to a reduction in net consumer spend. That's less money flowing into the the industry overall. From an industry health perspective that's terrible.

The only way this works long term is if volumes drastically increase in order to offset it (as in an increase in the number of core gamers, all of which ideally subscribe to one of these services). This clearly isn't proving to be the case based on console sales numbers, those are shrinking as well.

This is why you see xbox and Phil pushing cloud gaming as aggressively as they are and why they constantly talk about "billions of gamers". If this doesn't play out like they need it to they will actually end up making less money.

Sony following them down this path is foolish, and rightly so, Nintendo can probably see the writing on the wall so are staying well away from it. If unsuccessful the involved parties will need to pivot back towards a traditional purchase led business model, which will prove to be difficult after years of conditioning gamers into believing games aren't worth purchasing.
That’s my problem with the entire situation. If Microsoft fails at this subscription service, all of those companies they acquired will be severely crippled. The money it would take fund all studios would require a huge amount gamers to move to game pass. I don’t see that happening. They say they have numbers worked out, we’ll see.
 
Last edited:

Punished Miku

Gold Member
That’s my problem with the entire situation. If Microsoft fails at this subscription service, all of those companies they acquired will be severely crippled.
Most were already. Remember Dungeon Siege III? Me neither. This was them getting a lifeline in a AAA apocalypse. You guys have it backwards.
 
Last edited:

Lognor

Banned
I'm not a collector, that's for sure. I haven't purchased physical in over 4 years.

However if someone had all the games I have digitally in physical form turned round to me and said I'm not an enthusiast based on their criteria I'm not questioning it. Just like how I can't relate to anyone who would limit their gaming to what happens to appear on a digital rental subscription, at that point you're not even in control of how you spend your time with your hobby.

Like I said, different tiers.
The great thing (one of the many great things about game pass) is it's not an exclusive delivery method! So if I want to play elden ring, I can still do that! And even if a game is on game pass I can still buy it physically or digitally on Xbox!

But you sure are in support of gate keeping. You say you're an enthusiast but if a physical game owner said you're not an enthusiast you wouldn't argue with them. Lol. You just roll with it, huh?
 

MHubert

Member
Jim Ryan said, "We believe in generations" just a few months before Sony quietly confirmed that three of its planned launch titles were cross-gen with PS5 and PS4 (and Horizon was confirmed cross-gen the same day the game was announced, same with Spidey and Sackboy; Gran Turismo may have been a late choice to port down, according to some rumors but probably we'll never know for sure.)

So, okay, I guess maybe those beliefs held strong for 4 whole months?

Also, knock it off with your circular logic that them making a new box means they believed in making a new box. People understand new hardware is meant to deliver on new expectations. This gen has been frustratingly slow to deliver what elitists might call "true next-gen" (although in terms of play speed and cool controller features, this generation genuinely arrived), and we can debate about whether cross-gen has actually been an anchor on these first few years of games or if it's just a matter of the state of the industry and technology that next-gen exclusives aren't kicking ass like past gens, but nobody is looking at the current slate of PS5 and Xbox Series titles and considering them to be Mission Accomplished.

Believe that.
You seem to forget that "we believe in generations" was a direct response to phil spinning not having any next-gen exclusives for 2 years into the "no gamer left behind" rhetoric. People who took that as a promise of no first party cross-gen titles going forward are simply making stuff up.
 

Hobbygaming

has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
I've said it before, I'll say it again. It's leading to a reduction in net consumer spend. That's less money flowing into the the industry overall. From an industry health perspective that's terrible.

The only way this works long term is if volumes drastically increase in order to offset it (as in an increase in the number of core gamers, all of which ideally subscribe to one of these services). This clearly isn't proving to be the case based on console sales numbers, those are shrinking as well.

This is why you see xbox and Phil pushing cloud gaming as aggressively as they are and why they constantly talk about "billions of gamers". If this doesn't play out like they need it to they will actually end up making less money.

Sony following them down this path is foolish, and rightly so, Nintendo can probably see the writing on the wall so are staying well away from it. If unsuccessful the involved parties will need to pivot back towards a traditional purchase led business model, which will prove to be difficult after years of conditioning gamers into believing games aren't worth purchasing.
Dj Khaled Compliment GIF
 

Stooky

Member
Most were already. Remember Dungeon Siege III? Me neither. This was them getting a lifeline in a AAA apocalypse. You guys have it backwards.
I’m talking about game devs budgets north of 80mill. They aquired several studios that fit bill. It will depend on which games are day1 games pass and exclusive to the platform.
 
Last edited:

GHG

Member
If you're referencing me, you're making a lot of assumptions that have no baring in reality.

As I said I own all the platforms and purchase games I'm interested in, I'm not however, going to purchase things I already have / soon will have access to.

One day I'll aspire to such greatness of double dipping and owning things I can already play. That will be the day I can truly say, I enjoy video games.

I was speaking in general terms but if it happens to include you then so be it.

Just remember, you were the one who brought "enthusiasts" into the conversation, because apparently all enthusiasts should care about is as many people possible having access beyond anything else, even if it means we ultimately end up making sacrifices in key areas. To provide an on topic example, if Sony putting their games on a rental subscription service and expanding their potential audience tenfold means we end up with a drop in quality and/or chronic issues with scheduling then I don't want it. Keep it niche for all I care.

If all you care about is having "access" to as many games as possible without a care for anything else then the subscriptions suit you perfectly, you should be happy and nothing I say should change that.

It's also not about money, never has been. People enjoyed this hobby long before the advent of subscription services and I'm sure you would have found a way to as well (and will continue to should this subscription bubble ultimately burst).

That’s my problem with the entire situation. If Microsoft fails at this subscription service, all of those companies they acquired will be severely crippled.

Not concerned about them. Any company that agrees to getting purchased knows what they are doing. People make games, not companies. If that were to happen then the quality people will go on to create their own studios and/or will get snapped up for roles elsewhere.
 
Last edited:

GHG

Member
The great thing (one of the many great things about game pass) is it's not an exclusive delivery method! So if I want to play elden ring, I can still do that! And even if a game is on game pass I can still buy it physically or digitally on Xbox!

But you sure are in support of gate keeping. You say you're an enthusiast but if a physical game owner said you're not an enthusiast you wouldn't argue with them. Lol. You just roll with it, huh?

Why do I need to argue with them? I'm happy with my delivery method of choice for my hobbies, I don't need to prove anything to individuals who are evidently more invested than I am. It's not that deep.
 

Menzies

Banned
I was speaking in general terms but if it happens to include you then so be it.

Just remember, you were the one who brought "enthusiasts" into the conversation, because apparently all enthusiasts should care about is as many people possible having access beyond anything else, even if it means we ultimately end up making sacrifices in key areas. To provide an on topic example, if Sony putting their games on a rental subscription service and expanding their potential audience tenfold means we end up with a drop in quality and/or chronic issues with scheduling then I don't want it. Keep it niche for all I care.

If all you care about is having "access" to as many games as possible without a care for anything else then the subscriptions suit you perfectly, you should be happy and nothing I say should change that.

It's also not about money, never has been. People enjoyed this hobby long before the advent of subscription services and I'm sure you would have found a way to as well (and will continue to should this subscription bubble ultimately burst).



Not concerned about them. Any company that agrees to getting purchased knows what they are doing. People make games, not companies. If that were to happen then the quality people will go on to create their own studios and/or will get snapped up for roles elsewhere.
Can you point to where this irrational fear of drop in quality comes from? We've seen a few games from all platforms be delayed, including Microsoft in favor of quality.

It continues to be this baseless fear campaigning/fan-fiction from what I can tell. But keep denying yourself, an enthusiast before a gamer, access to good deals for all I care.
 

Neofire

Member
"The new PS Plus has tiers and essentially it’s like the old PS Plus, we still release two or three new games every month and a new tier, Extra, has a catalogue of hundreds of games for people to play. For Extra, our approach [is] we like to help the publishers [with] lifecycle management. I was managing first-party [at PlayStation] so I know that it’s like in the movies — a movie comes out at the theatre first, then goes to pay per view, or a subscription service, or free TV, every time generating new revenue and reaching out to a broader audience."

[/URL]

PlayStation with the 'If it aint broke' approach...
Yoshida has always had his head on straight. Just imagine if they made him CEO of Playstation instead of you know who.
 

CamHostage

Member
You seem to forget that "we believe in generations" was a direct response to phil spinning not having any next-gen exclusives for 2 years into the "no gamer left behind" rhetoric. People who took that as a promise of no first party cross-gen titles going forward are simply making stuff up.

No, it wasn't.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/sonys...ing-that-can-only-be-enjoyed-on-playstation-5
Gamesindustry.biz, May 29, 2020

One way to keep PS4 users engaged would be to make upcoming PS5 games playable on the older machine, just like Microsoft is proposing with its Xbox Series X games being playable on Xbox One. Yet Ryan says that's not something PlayStation is interested in doing.

"We have always said that we believe in generations. We believe that when you go to all the trouble of creating a next-gen console, that it should include features and benefits that the previous generation does not include. And that, in our view, people should make games that can make the most of those features.

"We do believe in generations, and whether it's the DualSense controller, whether it's the 3D audio, whether it's the multiple ways that the SSD can be used... we are thinking that it is time to give the PlayStation community something new, something different, that can really only be enjoyed on PS5."

At best, it was an advertisement for the unique PS5 features, including DualSense controller and 3D audio and the SSD, rather than a claim that exclusive next-gen software is software to believe in. (It was also just talk in an interview, not a formal, prepared statement in a major press event or platform announcement or showcase, so sure, cut him a little slack if you feel like the meme ran overboard.)

However, when he said, "it is time to give the PlayStation community something new, something different, that can really only be enjoyed on PS5", if you believe that what he was really referring to was a fancier controller and some quality-of-life enhancements of otherwise familiar games, well, I don't believe you.
 

MHubert

Member
No, it wasn't.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/sonys...ing-that-can-only-be-enjoyed-on-playstation-5
Gamesindustry.biz, May 29, 2020



At best, it was an advertisement for the unique PS5 features, including DualSense controller and 3D audio and the SSD, rather than a claim that exclusive next-gen software is software to believe in. (It was also just talk in an interview, not a formal, prepared statement in a major press event or platform announcement or showcase, so sure, cut him a little slack if you feel like the meme ran overboard.)
However, when he said, "it is time to give the PlayStation community something new, something different, that can really only be enjoyed on PS5", if you believe that what he was really referring to was a fancier controller and some quality-of-life enhancements of otherwise familiar games, well, I don't believe you.
I took it as "we are going to have next-gen only games from launch", which they had. I still don't see where people get the 'no-crossgen games' from.
 

GHG

Member
Can you point to where this irrational fear of drop in quality comes from? We've seen a few games from all platforms be delayed, including Microsoft in favor of quality.

It continues to be this baseless fear campaigning/fan-fiction from what I can tell. But keep denying yourself, an enthusiast before a gamer, access to good deals for all I care.

It's not irrational if it's evidenced. One single outlier year ("publisher of the year" blah blah blah) doesn't offset everything else that we've all witnessed (and continue to witness). If they want to change the perception then the onus is on them to prove it.

From an economic point of view it's even more simple. Look at the sales numbers and then do the math to see how many single month subscribers would be required for a single release to offset the reduced sales revenue over the initial 12 months (single month because if it's a single player game and not some crappy FOMO inducing GAAS title then a month is all someone will need to complete it). Less revenue = less reinvestment for future titles.

There's a reason why the vast majority of best selling 3rd party titles don't and won't release on a subscription service day one. It's called money. Who in their right mind agrees to putting something like Elden Ring or GTA on one of these services day one?

So yeh, this whole thing literally boils down to "I want cheap access to games, don't give a fuck about anything else", even if it's to the detriment of what we will ultimely end up with in the future. Sony are able to consistently produce high quality games and people consistently buy them. Why exactly do they need to change their winning formula?

What is this, follow the market loser?
 
Last edited:

CamHostage

Member
I took it as "we are going to have next-gen only games from launch", which they had. I still don't see where people get the 'no-crossgen games' from.

...Maybe you mean "next-gen only game from launch"?

Demon's Souls is PlayStation Studios' only PS5-exclusive game available launch day. (They would have had two if Destruction All-Stars hadn't self-destructed.)

One is still better than the Zero Xbox Game Studio supported their console with, though, and the PS5 "launch period" added in a few more like DAS, R&C Rift Apart, and Returnal, whereas I think Xbox's only homegrown Xbox Series exclusive is still Flight Sim.

Believe what you want in interpreting the quote. Given that it was (or was framed to be) in response to Microsoft's announcement of continued cross-gen support, it doesn't make sense to me why you can't "see" the dots that people connected. And Sony didn't do anything to change the narrative on that statement until September, when its cross-gen plans were added into the fine print after the big PS5 "Future of PlayStation" Showcase.

Read these two statements and say that you took both to describe exactly the same corporate belief. (Ultimately, that's what we ended up with; each console manufacturer produced both exclusives and cross-gen as each game called for, and so far has put little premium on hardware exclusives in the grand scheme of their portfolio.)

As our content comes out over the next year, two years, all of our games, sort of like PC, will play up and down that family of devices,” Booty explains. “We want to make sure that if someone invests in Xbox between now and [Series X] that they feel that they made a good investment and that we’re committed to them with content.”
Matt Booty, Xbox Game Studios, January 10 2020

"We have always said that we believe in generations. We believe that when you go to all the trouble of creating a next-gen console, that it should include features and benefits that the previous generation does not include. And that, in our view, people should make games that can make the most of those features.
We do believe in generations, and whether it's the DualSense controller, whether it's the 3D audio, whether it's the multiple ways that the SSD can be used... we are thinking that it is time to give the PlayStation community something new, something different, that can really only be enjoyed on PS5."
Jim Ryan, Sony Interactive Entertainment President and CEO, May 29, 2020
 
Last edited:

JTCx

Member
This is a really bad argument in your part. Your trying to gate keep what makes someone an enthusiastic? Really?

Even your argument against Netflix is weak as fuck.

Really think about what you typed there. I can understand that YOU want to own your movies, your games, your music, etc. But that is NOT what makes someone an enthusiastic. Why do I even need to say this? Such a weird take on your part.

So a cinephile that goes to see movies every week in a theater is not actually an enthusiasts because they don't own the films? And if they do own the them, but own them digitally they're less of an enthusiast than someone that owns the bluray? Yikes. Seriously, think about what you wrote. Bizarre take.
A non-enthusiast like you wouldnt understand.
 

Menzies

Banned
It's not irrational if it's evidenced. One single outlier year ("publisher of the year" blah blah blah) doesn't offset everything else that we've all witnessed (and continue to witness). If they want to change the perception then the onus is on them to prove it.

From an economic point of view it's even more simple. Look at the sales numbers and then do the math to see how many single month subscribers would be required for a single release to offset the reduced sales revenue over the initial 12 months (single month because if it's a single player game and not some crappy FOMO inducing GAAS title then a month is all someone will need to complete it). Less revenue = less reinvestment for future titles.

There's a reason why the vast majority of best selling 3rd party titles don't and won't release on a subscription service day one. It's called money. Who in their right mind agrees to putting something like Elden Ring or GTA on one of these services day one?

So yeh, this whole thing literally boils down to "I want cheap access to games, don't give a fuck about anything else", even if it's to the detriment of what we will ultimely end up with in the future. Sony are able to consistently produce high quality games and people consistently buy them. Why exactly do they need to change their winning formula?

What is this, follow the market loser?
Well I think we need to part ways here as I'm not seeing "blah blah blah" as an argument and I think all current signs for their future games look high quality and big investment.

Does Xbox revenue numbers show things are going backwards? I thought they were earning more now than ever before.

Yeah, sounds like one company has a vision and the other is just 'me too' responding for the most part.
 
I've said it before, I'll say it again. It's leading to a reduction in net consumer spend. That's less money flowing into the the industry overall. From an industry health perspective that's terrible.

The only way this works long term is if volumes drastically increase in order to offset it (as in an increase in the number of core gamers, all of which ideally subscribe to one of these services). This clearly isn't proving to be the case based on console sales numbers, those are shrinking as well.

This is why you see xbox and Phil pushing cloud gaming as aggressively as they are and why they constantly talk about "billions of gamers". If this doesn't play out like they need it to they will actually end up making less money.

Sony following them down this path is foolish, and rightly so, Nintendo can probably see the writing on the wall so are staying well away from it. If unsuccessful the involved parties will need to pivot back towards a traditional purchase led business model, which will prove to be difficult after years of conditioning gamers into believing games aren't worth purchasing.
Word I Agree GIF by INTO ACTION

Showtime Recording GIF by CBS
 
Last edited:

Stooky

Member
Which studios?

Im pretty sure they won't be cutting budgets on Bethesda or Activision
Each one of those publishers has mutilple high cost projects in development. Microsoft can’t money hat the projects on game pass forever at some point it has to become profitable in its own right. If not budgets will be cut and they will choose ‘the winners’ the games that pull in the most players to gpass. That’s why I don’t like them buying a huge publisher like activision. If they take a loss for too long they will make cuts, studios will get canablized. You could see the death of some smaller studios. You see this happen in almost every large merger.
 
Last edited:
Anyone with a functioning brain will know why gamepass approach for Sony won’t work, first of all the production and quality of 1st party games is obvious to see, secondly MS is a ginormous company who can eat costs for their Xbox division and it won’t affect them much which Sony clearly can’t afford and won’t.

Yes, as a consumer we’d like something like gamepass for Sony first party games but it just won’t work, the quality of 1st party games will have to be dramatically lowered.
 

CamHostage

Member
Sony started to to this back in 2010 with the release of PS Plus. As I remember it also did have time limited game trials, PS1 and PSP games back then btw.

Later they released a game subscription with a catalog of hundreds of games, before MS did it. And cloud gaming service targeting first console but also other devices announcing day one that down the road it would reach mobile and PC too, also before MS did it.

Eh, Sony kind of started a ball rolling that now MS is riding on top of, either to jump the canyon and claim the great beyond or to fall into the abyss and drag down everybody with it (hyperbolic, I know,) but PS Plus wasn't really the same thing as Game Pass until Game Pass pushed harder.

I don't really remember all of the steps of Xbox Live to Xbox Gold to Xbox Game Pass to Xbox Whatnot, but PS Plus started as just sort of a gift program; they used to have free online, but when they started charging for it like Xbox did, people were angry, but Sony made them happy by giving them two games a month. Not the best games, not the newest games, not the Sony games that many people bought PlayStations for, but "free" is free, even if you're paying $10 a month for freebies and/or online play. And the games actually got better over time; at first, it was last year's basketball game and maybe a pretty decent Codemasters title that not enough people played, but something nice to have if you didn't already own them. Eventually though, there were some pretty good months mixed in with the bad months. And then Vita came out, and for a while it was 3 games a month (and RIP Vita, but for a little while they substituted PSVR games as the third game when Vita lost its life.) If you had been diligently adding every PS Plus game to your library every month since 2010, you would have had a library of over 700 games by now! But if you were to sign up for regular old PS Plus any time up until last June (I think things changed with PS Essentials?), you wouldn't get 700 games, you would just get that month's 2 games. Sure, there's tiers where you can pay more to get more "free", but you've still got to go out and pay for Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart or Horizon Forbidden West or TLoU1 if you want to play those big games.

(*I'm probably forgetting parts of how PS Plus worked, let me know where I messed up?)

Xbox Game Pass is a different monster. It was a declaration that you would get everything, e.v.e.r.y.thing, always, from the Xbox internal studio library, by buying into their subscription service. And then, they paid $75 billion dollars to acquire two more studios (make that studios-of-studios; publishers actually, but the publishing side of both companies are in question as the parent companies get absorbed,) and bring all of those games to the Game Pass library. Plus they had already started signing on other publishers (whose titles dropped in and out of the service, but still, there was some big libraries included; PS+ also has versions of some of these deals too,) and also hooking up indies to have those games also on Game Pass.

To the point now that, if you're still buying Xbox games to play on your Xbox... why?? What games are you still buying that aren't on Game Pass? How much gaming do you need when you've already got so much stuff on Game Pass available for "free"? What doesn't Game Pass give you? (It's facetious question, of course not everything is on Game Pass... but man, it can really feel that way sometimes.)

That's the difference. PS Plus was always a nice little supplement in addition to the great games you happily buy individually to amass your collection, whereas Xbox Game Pass is selling itself as a neverending, all-included smorgasborg that they're just feeding you, and feeding you, and feeding you...
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom