KillzoneIt's like i can see where this is going...basically release games like Life is Strange. In chapters...like we get TV shows on streaming platforms or something. Yeah...no. I'd rather get the full game experience and pay for it full price.
Where's Sackboy? Ratchet? Killzone? Gran Turismo? Dreams? Spider-Man? Concrete Genie? Returnal? That probably wouldn't fit the narrative, right?
Funny thing is that picture was created to mock people that criticize PlayStation games...and it's now being used like a serious thing by that same crowd, lmao.
Let me grab the Nintendo template. I'm sure they also have trees in more than 2 games...or MS.
Gamepass is not being subsidized, according to the CEO of Microsoft Gaming.
even with that, what COD killer WILL come out? MS basically owns every studio responsible for the most popular shooters, excluding epic. That's a pretty low chance of a COD killer even happening IMO.
RIPWhat makes a game "Quality" is the real question? Is it this...
Seems the loud majority have decided that 3rd person single player adventure games are the bar for which "quality" is judged. Beyond this one genre of games I don't see where Sony's "quality" is any better than any other developer.
Yes, because Lord Phil has NEVER thrown shade subtly towards Sony when releasing statements, ever. And Sony has never congratulated or said praise either.It's funny to see how negative Jimbo is towards Microsoft, while Spencer is simping positive comments about Sony.
Look at all the problems 1st party Gamepass games are having, they cant invest the same amount of money Sony does they will lose profitsIt’s so fucking obvious but fanboys can’t admit it and can only rage when you say this.
It's funny to see how negative Jimbo is towards Microsoft, while Spencer is simping positive comments about Sony.
I don't understand how options is bad.Smart man, I'm glad he's in the Sony CEO with this logic. The subscription model I can't stand and GAAS. Hopefully they will keep this sentiment for a while.
MS just wants to charge you for every little thing for any reason MS office comes to mind as a good example of something you could buy is not behind a high ass subscription. Hence why their behinds are getting dragged on Social media for the recent DRM mess.
Forza Horizon 5 is much less "monetized" than Gran Tursimo 7. Only one of them is on GamePass.They will look for other ways to make money like more Season Passes and MTX. The biggest games on GamePass (Halo, Forza, Flight Sim) have quite a bit of monetization in them.
Depends on your stance on those things I guess. For me it's definitely a decline in quality.
How can you say this with a straight face after Microsoft literally spent over $76.2 billion in the past 3 years expanding their first party portfolio.Look at all the problems 1st party Gamepass games are having, they cant invest the same amount of money Sony does they will lose profits
Try to read my post again.
RPG GamesOne things Sony can't do very well is the RPG games
I'd never said neither of those things.Yes, because Lord Phil has NEVER thrown shade subtly towards Sony when releasing statements, ever. And Sony has never congratulated or said praise either.
We only have a message board that has posted all of the above for all of the above over the years.
The fucking Kool aide some of you drink, I swear.
I'd never said neither of those things.
They congratulate each other over sales, anniversaries whatever, because they are not competitive in the same way as fanboys are.
My kool aid abuse probably made my post more aggressive than it had to be, but my point still stands regard Ryan's statement and game pass.
to make true rpgs requires alot of talent , look at baldur's gate 3 , the story is mature and complex , the choice and consequence is a very big part of the game , ive played it for over 100 hours and i still find it hard to pick a sideOne things Sony can't do very well is the RPG games. While horizon and God of War have some element RPG, it's not really a true RPG games.
That's not an argument in favor of subscription services or against. GaaS games are basically their own thing. They are a different way for game studios to engage with their customers and earn money.Can't wait for this argument to be rendered mute by the influx of shitty GaaS titles Sony has already announced to take priority going forward.
We know Sony invests money into creating first-party titles to sell to us. In order to support a service like Game Pass, they'd have to allocate resources towards it; with a good library of games it will mean nothing. Can Sony continue making the type of games they make with resources divided between that and a sub service that they also need to promote?Speaking as part of the Q&A session following Sony’s financial results this week, CFO Totoki inferred that were Sony to follow Microsoft’s Game Pass model, it could result in fewer resources allocated to first-party titles, and thus a decline in quality.
These 43.9M copies are only for PS4 and PS5. They also sold in PC and Xbox. And on top of that these games also generated money from being included in their game subs. Plus there were also sold add-on content for them like DLC or MTX. They generated much more money than these $1.3B.Sony sold 43M first party titles last year. Assuming an ASP of $30, that translates to $1.3B.
Sony currently has 47M PS+ subscribers. If they could convert 30M of them to a super high tier of Plus that costs an additional $130 a year, that would translate to $3.9B of new revenue. The problem is that Sony would also need to supplement this service with a ton of 3rd party deals, or AA first party games. Subscription services are all about quantity and they would need to make sure there’s a steady stream of content to keep people subscribed.
That's worth it to keep those games off PlayStation. That's just business. Corporate America acquires companies all the time just so the competition doesn't get those products or services.How can you say this with a straight face after Microsoft literally spent over $76.2 billion in the past 3 years expanding their first party portfolio.
My opinion is absurd but yours isn't? Shall me out the with that "walled garden" catch phrase. It's been proven that GAAS can and had hurt developers. If MS was to force feed it's user base with subscription's then that's their prerogative but it doesn't mean Sony has to or even Nintendo.I don't understand how options is bad.
"I don't like GaaS, I don't like subscriptions, Microsoft ruins gaming by giving me options."
You aren't forced to rent your games only. You can still buy them, unlike Nintendo with n64 games and Sony with streaming ps3 games.
Regarding office, I think I have a free version that's permanent l for some reason?
And Microsoft has the audacity to, besides supporting a free version of office, also an alternative called one drive, and Google drive fully supports it as well.
Less choices, more walled gardens and being forced to do what our great leader says.
To mods: my post ain't fanboying, its just to show Neofire how absurd his comment is by reversing his logic.
Exactly.. Budget doesn't equate quality necessarily.I think quality depends on the devs themselves. While budget can give them the resources to make the game big. It still is possible to make smaller high quality titles with a low budget.
Exactly.. Budget doesn't equate quality necessarily.
How do we know that this is a lie?