• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

News Sony Defends PS Plus Price Hike, Explains Why It Won't Put Games There Day One

ohlawd said:
They really got away with a 30% price increase on Plus.

They've released nothing this year and their reward for it is constantly topping the charts.

Gamers, we are so back.
Click to expand...
tbf their competition is xbox and a 7 year old console. we'll see if they keep up their bullshit against a switch 2 with nintendo games + CoD, fifa and potentially gta.
 
With everything else also getting more expensive you won't even notice that you're paying more to not play online with your friends because you're all too tired from work.
 
TreeSign said:
GaaS doesn’t bode well as they tend to fizzle out and are rarely able to capture lightning in a bottle.
Click to expand...
They only tend to fizzle if they are bad/uninteresting or handled really poorly. You don’t necessarily need lightening to have a good GAAS game. If Sony captures lightening once then it would be all worth it for them.
 
“You’ll want to work a second job to afford a PS3!”

PlayStation is a doomed brand without a course adjustment. It will go into decline as it has a lot of good will built up with EU and NA customers that will only gradually diminish. However if Xbox can go from a successful X360 to sales falling off a cliff and retailers dropping them, it can happen to PlayStation too.

Right now, if you want to see PlayStation’s future, look to the present in Japan. Without being the de facto exclusive platform for FIFA or Call of Duty, they no longer have a competitive advantage. The new GAAS’s won’t do it as the looter shooter fad is in decline. There haven’t been any new hit looter shooter since Anthem bombed. (It’s just like MMO’s… there used to me at least a dozen of those and now Warcraft and FF14 is all that is left)

The AAA Japanese third parties are now unable to supply an ample flow of software to distinguish PlayStation over Nintendo because PlayStation drove the cost and time of making a AAA title so high that they can only put out one or two per year.

PlayStation will get more money now out of their existing customer base with this price increase. They certainly won’t make any new customers, though. Their current customers will gradually fade into disinterest and they won’t be replaced. You’ll see that decline next generation when the people who remember PlayStation’s glory days in the late ‘90’s and early 2000’s lose interest.
 
Last edited:
AngryAlchemist said:
Nintendo Good. Sony Bad.
Click to expand...
I thought PlayStation was my home... I thought Spider-Man was my friend. Feeling pretty betrayed right now. I think I'm gonna ask Mario if he'll come over, dress up in his cat costume, and be the emotional support cuddle buddy I need.
 
Old Sorta Fan said:
“You’ll want to work a second job to afford a PS3!”

PlayStation is a doomed brand without a course adjustment. It will go into decline as it has a lot of good will built up with EU and NA customers that will only gradually diminish. However if Xbox can go from a successful X360 to sales falling off a cliff and retailers dropping them, it can happen to PlayStation too.

Right now, if you want to see PlayStation’s future, look to the present in Japan. Without being the de facto exclusive platform for FIFA or Call of Duty, they no longer have a competitive advantage. The new GAAS’s won’t do it as the looter shooter fad is in decline. There haven’t been any new hit looter shooter since Anthem bombed. (It’s just like MMO’s… there used to me at least a dozen of those and now Warcraft and FF14 is all that is left)

The AAA Japanese third parties are now unable to supply an ample flow of software to distinguish PlayStation over Nintendo because PlayStation drove the cost and time of making a AAA title so high that they can only put out one or two per year.

PlayStation will get more money now out of their existing customer base with this price increase. They certainly won’t make any new customers, though. Their current customers will gradually fade into disinterest and they won’t be replaced. You’ll see that decline next generation when the people who remember PlayStation’s glory days in the late ‘90’s and early 2000’s lose interest.
Click to expand...
I think the only “hope” Sony has is to refresh and revive their IPs. Other than that, for the next gen, they should also focus on delivering a machine that’s simpler and more cost effective to develop for

The Nintendo DS was called the Developers’ System because of how the HD era was causing dev costs to go to very high levels. Sony should consider that high dev costs can be a barrier for a more active pipeline of software
 
Dardan Sandiego said:
With everything else also getting more expensive you won't even notice that you're paying more to not play online with your friends because you're all too tired from work.
Click to expand...
This is me. Literally me. When I used to buy groceries I'd usually have so much of a surplus I'd end up donating some because we just couldn't eat it fast enough now 500 bucks barely feeds 2 people for half the month, and that's just ONE thing that got astronomically expensive. I'm slowly killing my body and mental health working 6 sometimes 7 days a week and I cannot keep up with it anymore. I've had to cut the fat and some of the bone too and some of these greedy ass companies make it very easy to do so. Streaming services and all the other fluff too. I'm over it.
 
robertman2 said:
Because PCs are much more expensive, both in regards to hardware and games, significantly less user-friendly, and most ports are broken on release.
Click to expand...
More expensive wrt games? Most ports are broken?
What?

I'll give you more expensive hardware (in relation to consoles and their power during the first few years of a generation, so 3-4) and less user-friendly / easy to use, but these other two make it look like you don't really know what you're talking about other than having picked up on some DF PC port headlines these last two years.
 
Raising prices for growing game catalogue subscriptions is one thing (a thing that I think is on its way to imploding anyways, movie/tv wise as well), but paying for online access is so overly outdated at this point (not that it ever wasn't). But people on all 3 platforms "gladly" pay for it (including myself) so it probably isn't changing anytime soon. Even a 4th tier at the bottom at a cheaper cost for ONLY online access would be a nice option for those who just want that.

Anyways, I'd like the take this opportunity to remind everyone that Playstation is totally doomed and that I left the brand after the PS3 area when they abandoned anime and scrimblos.
 
Imitatio said:
More expensive wrt games? Most ports are broken?
What?

I'll give you more expensive hardware (in relation to consoles and their power during the first few years of a generation, so 3-4) and less user-friendly / easy to use, but these other two make it look like you don't really know what you're talking about other than having picked up some DF PC port headlines these last two years.
Click to expand...
Physical games on console go cheaper faster and lower than digital pc games do.
 
0
Absolutely shameful company. Mario > Spider-Man 2 btw. Nintendo would never overcharge for online.
 
I've read this a couple of times already and i keep wondering how can Sony be so shameless about all the price hiking without adding nothing of value to the mix.

Though i don't agree on the general feeling about PS5 in the thread. The PS4 library by itself already makes it a very valuable machine, and then games like Returnal make the console it. Sure, there's only a few Sony developed PS exclusives, but i bought a PS2 for Lament of Innocence so what do i know.

Also, please save me the PC slander, fami. PC gaming is great.
 
Old Sorta Fan said:
“You’ll want to work a second job to afford a PS3!”

PlayStation is a doomed brand without a course adjustment. It will go into decline as it has a lot of good will built up with EU and NA customers that will only gradually diminish. However if Xbox can go from a successful X360 to sales falling off a cliff and retailers dropping them, it can happen to PlayStation too.

Right now, if you want to see PlayStation’s future, look to the present in Japan. Without being the de facto exclusive platform for FIFA or Call of Duty, they no longer have a competitive advantage. The new GAAS’s won’t do it as the looter shooter fad is in decline. There haven’t been any new hit looter shooter since Anthem bombed. (It’s just like MMO’s… there used to me at least a dozen of those and now Warcraft and FF14 is all that is left)

The AAA Japanese third parties are now unable to supply an ample flow of software to distinguish PlayStation over Nintendo because PlayStation drove the cost and time of making a AAA title so high that they can only put out one or two per year.

PlayStation will get more money now out of their existing customer base with this price increase. They certainly won’t make any new customers, though. Their current customers will gradually fade into disinterest and they won’t be replaced. You’ll see that decline next generation when the people who remember PlayStation’s glory days in the late ‘90’s and early 2000’s lose interest.
Click to expand...

While I'm not a big fan of some of Sony's decisions, I disagree that the PlayStation brand is doomed.

They never had any "de facto" exclusivity with FIFA or Call of Duty. EA FC (formerly FIFA), is being bundled with PS5's across the world. Alot of people associate that franchise with Sony and it won't change any time soon. Yes, Sony is going to lose Call of Duty marketing rights after next year's game, but the game will continue to appear on the PlayStation ecosystem for at least a decade. People buy it because their friends game on the same system. Everyone isn't going to run out and buy Xbox's next year just because the tv commercials have a different console brand at the end. The day may come when Call of Duty is no longer on PlayStation, and that will be a huge deal when it happens, but it isn't any time soon.

Yes, Sony's output has slowed down because of the growing length of game development (not to mention COVID happened). That said, the games that they do put out are almost always rated highly and well received by fans. PS Studios is known for its quality. If you want to play those games at launch, you can only play it on PlayStation. As far as the quantity goes, this year is definitely lighter but last year they released 4 big games. With 16 different studios working on titles (some are working on multiple projects), they are going to come out at some point.

GAAS is definitely a hot button topic, but there are two truths. One, the most played games on PlayStation are usually some sort of GAAS/live service game. Second, there is a lot of money to be made with those games. Sony makes billions off microtransactions every year off the likes of Fortnite and GTA, and that is just taking a ~30% cut. It makes business sense for Sony to take a wack at those types of games again. Sony made plenty of multiplayer games in the PS3 era, and many of them were well received. Lastly, just because it is a GAAS project doesn't mean it is automatically a loot shooter. We haven't seen gameplay for most of those projects, let alone see them get announced.

Sony has been positioning PlayStation to be a premium brand, like Apple. And for the most part it seems to be working. Their $70 games keep breaking records. The $200 premium controller has been a big hit, as noted in the monthy NPD/Circana reports. The system went through a price hike in many markets last year, and console sales haven't slowed down. Right now there are ~45m Ps Plus subscribers. Even if 11m drop their sub because of the price hike (won't happen), Sony still breaks even. Do I like that it is getting more expensive to game? Hell no. Is it working for Sony? Absolutely.

Lastly, I disagree that the "glory days" of PlayStation are a long time ago. Yes, Sony lost a ton of market share with the PS3 for many reasons, but they rebounded very well with the PS4. In that same interview as the PS Plus talk, they mentioned that they are expecting to sell the most PlayStation consoles ever this year. Their market share over Xbox has increased since the beginning of the generation. The PlayStation brand is still flourishing just fine.

So while tomorrow is promised to no one, Sony is currently in a very good position for now. Yes, Microsoft is building their first party umbrella, and that will make the next generation very interesting, but it isn't doom and gloom for Sony. As long as their studios continue to make great games and the third party support continues, they won't die off.
 
Josh5890 said:
While I'm not a big fan of some of Sony's decisions, I disagree that the PlayStation brand is doomed.

They never had any "de facto" exclusivity with FIFA or Call of Duty. EA FC (formerly FIFA), is being bundled with PS5's across the world. Alot of people associate that franchise with Sony and it won't change any time soon. Yes, Sony is going to lose Call of Duty marketing rights after next year's game, but the game will continue to appear on the PlayStation ecosystem for at least a decade. People buy it because their friends game on the same system. Everyone isn't going to run out and buy Xbox's next year just because the tv commercials have a different console brand at the end. The day may come when Call of Duty is no longer on PlayStation, and that will be a huge deal when it happens, but it isn't any time soon.

Yes, Sony's output has slowed down because of the growing length of game development (not to mention COVID happened). That said, the games that they do put out are almost always rated highly and well received by fans. PS Studios is known for its quality. If you want to play those games at launch, you can only play it on PlayStation. As far as the quantity goes, this year is definitely lighter but last year they released 4 big games. With 16 different studios working on titles (some are working on multiple projects), they are going to come out at some point.

GAAS is definitely a hot button topic, but there are two truths. One, the most played games on PlayStation are usually some sort of GAAS/live service game. Second, there is a lot of money to be made with those games. Sony makes billions off microtransactions every year off the likes of Fortnite and GTA, and that is just taking a ~30% cut. It makes business sense for Sony to take a wack at those types of games again. Sony made plenty of multiplayer games in the PS3 era, and many of them were well received. Lastly, just because it is a GAAS project doesn't mean it is automatically a loot shooter. We haven't seen gameplay for most of those projects, let alone see them get announced.

Sony has been positioning PlayStation to be a premium brand, like Apple. And for the most part it seems to be working. Their $70 games keep breaking records. The $200 premium controller has been a big hit, as noted in the monthy NPD/Circana reports. The system went through a price hike in many markets last year, and console sales haven't slowed down. Right now there are ~45m Ps Plus subscribers. Even if 11m drop their sub because of the price hike (won't happen), Sony still breaks even. Do I like that it is getting more expensive to game? Hell no. Is it working for Sony? Absolutely.

Lastly, I disagree that the "glory days" of PlayStation are a long time ago. Yes, Sony lost a ton of market share with the PS3 for many reasons, but they rebounded very well with the PS4. In that same interview as the PS Plus talk, they mentioned that they are expecting to sell the most PlayStation consoles ever this year. Their market share over Xbox has increased since the beginning of the generation. The PlayStation brand is still flourishing just fine.

So while tomorrow is promised to no one, Sony is currently in a very good position for now. Yes, Microsoft is building their first party umbrella, and that will make the next generation very interesting, but it isn't doom and gloom for Sony. As long as their studios continue to make great games and the third party support continues, they won't die off.
Click to expand...
Just with regard to GAAS, as someone that doesn’t really follow PlayStation, what is the issue around them? I followed the link in the OP and was surprised to read the following claim.

One Of PlayStation's Most Important People, Connie Booth, Has Left The Company After 30+ Years
Click to expand...

The co-creator of God of War alleges Connie Booth was fired after PlayStation began work on more live-service games.

By Eddie Makuch on October 27, 2023 at 7:40AM PDT
PlayStation veteran Connie Booth, who joined PlayStation decades ago and is one of the company's most important people, has left the company, a spokesperson for PlayStation confirmed. However, the nature of her exit remains a mystery amid a report that she was fired.
Click to expand...
"She was fired. She was not let go. She didn't retire. She didn't quit. She was fired," Jaffe said. He added that "apparently" she had no notice or advance warning. "It just kind of happened," he said.

Jaffe went on to say that outgoing PlayStation boss Jim Ryan gave a mandate for PlayStation's teams to make more games-as-a-service titles, which in turn reportedly upset a number of PlayStation developers. "All of this was somehow blamed on Connie," Jaffe said. "The blame has fallen on Connie."

GameSpot has contacted PlayStation in an attempt to get more details on this situation and specifically the nature of Booth's exit.
Click to expand...
www.gamespot.com

One Of PlayStation's Most Important People, Connie Booth, Has Left The Company After 30+ Years

The co-creator of God of War alleges Connie Booth was fired after PlayStation began work on more live-service games.
www.gamespot.com www.gamespot.com
 
I think if they positioned these as multiplayer games as opposed to GaaS games, the outrage online wouldn't be as extreme. Sony has really been slacking in the multiplayer area for a while now so it'll be interesting to see what we get from them, and most multiplayer games these days have paid content anyways (whether it be GaaS or paid expansions). So the two kind of go hand in hand. The "GaaS" term just has such a negative connotation these days.

I'm mostly just relieved that they're doing this stuff in addition to the single player projects as opposed to replacing them. I'd be a lot more bummed if that were the case. Worst case scenario here is we just get some multiplayer games that end up not being very successful in addition to what we've already been getting.
 
PixelKnight said:
Just with regard to GAAS, as someone that doesn’t really follow PlayStation, what is the issue around them?
Click to expand...
The issue is that they're completely opposite to Playstation's usual output, even the recent one.

GaaS games start with low content and grow up over time, while Sony usually pride themselves on releasing full experiences out of the box, both single player and multiplayer, and just recently they said they would be focusing on cinematic single player experiences, wich are mutually exclusive with GaaS stuff.

Take Splatoon 3 and imagine Nintendo releasing 60% of their output in the same manner: Content starved games that rely on emergent gameplay (generally multiplayer) to stay afloat while they keep updating with new content. Sounds bad? Well, that's what Playstation's big wigs wants.

As a Gran Turismo fan who skipped a whole gen - GT5 and GT6 - this hit me like a truck. GT7 is a GaaS game that relies both in multiplayer and slow progression to keep you busy while they keep updating. Prizes are ridiculous, reward tickets usually result in you getting a stupidly low amount of credits unless you get a 6 Star ticket, cars are crazy expensive, online Time Trials (wich give you a prize if you reach at least the bronze target time) are slow af so, even if you're good enough to reach bronze, it takes a long time to fill your wallet... The list just goes on and on.

With the extra addition that, if a game isn't succesful enough, it can be dropped without reaching the end of its roadmap - like it happened with Anthem and Avengers - wich is infuriating for those who play them.
 
Damn this thread went places(?), but it's also a Nintendo focused forums so eh 😅

Well anyway that price hike pretty much guaranteed mine won't renew Jan 31st 2024. I don't even play much online on my PS5. Going to just keep it as a 1st party machine with some third parties here and there.
 
BlackthornOrion said:
Just curious, but did you forget F-Zero 99, or do you just feel it being download-only/subscription-only disqualifies it from counting as a full release?

I could see an argument either way, but since people are bringing up things like DLC or the Horizon VR game, I would have figured it's fair game.
Click to expand...

Just forgot because it's not really something being sold, but yeah that should count too.
 
0
Reinhard Schneider said:
The issue is that they're completely opposite to Playstation's usual output, even the recent one.

GaaS games start with low content and grow up over time, while Sony usually pride themselves on releasing full experiences out of the box, both single player and multiplayer, and just recently they said they would be focusing on cinematic single player experiences, wich are mutually exclusive with GaaS stuff.

Take Splatoon 3 and imagine Nintendo releasing 60% of their output in the same manner: Content starved games that rely on emergent gameplay (generally multiplayer) to stay afloat while they keep updating with new content. Sounds bad? Well, that's what Playstation's big wigs wants.

As a Gran Turismo fan who skipped a whole gen - GT5 and GT6 - this hit me like a truck. GT7 is a GaaS game that relies both in multiplayer and slow progression to keep you busy while they keep updating. Prizes are ridiculous, reward tickets usually result in you getting a stupidly low amount of credits unless you get a 6 Star ticket, cars are crazy expensive, online Time Trials (wich give you a prize if you reach at least the bronze target time) are slow af so, even if you're good enough to reach bronze, it takes a long time to fill your wallet... The list just goes on and on.

With the extra addition that, if a game isn't succesful enough, it can be dropped without reaching the end of its roadmap - like it happened with Anthem and Avengers - wich is infuriating for those who play them.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the primer on the topic, much appreciated! ❤️
 
Jahranimo said:
Damn this thread went places(?), but it's also a Nintendo focused forums so eh 😅

Well anyway that price hike pretty much guaranteed mine won't renew Jan 31st 2024. I don't even play much online on my PS5. Going to just keep it as a 1st party machine with some third parties here and there.
Click to expand...
I don't play online almost at all. Only some GT7 and, possibly, Test Drive Unlimited: Solar Crown in the future.

The main pull for me was the retro library, but it isn't worth it after the price hike, i'd rather buy them myself.
 
Reinhard Schneider said:
I don't play online almost at all. Only some GT7 and, possibly, Test Drive Unlimited: Solar Crown in the future.

The main pull for me was the retro library, but it isn't worth it after the price hike, i'd rather buy them myself.
Click to expand...

The thing that disappointed me the most about the retro offerings is that you can't even buy them outright as is. It always prompted me to upgrade to PS+ Premium.

There were a few games I did play online like Borderlands 3 and Returnal but I'm done with the former and the latter I can double dip on Steam if I really wanted.

It sucks they will get away with this but I guess it is what it is. Sigh
 
0
Jahranimo said:
Damn this thread went places(?), but it's also a Nintendo focused forums so eh 😅
Click to expand...
On famiboards dot com one of the main reasons threads like this exist in the first place is so people can either act like Nintendo is above this stuff or to snarkily excuse Sony by making weird whataboutisms. The subject matter is secondary.
 
Dardan Sandiego said:
On famiboards dot com one of the main reasons threads like this exist in the first place is so people can either act like Nintendo is above this stuff or to snarkily excuse Sony by making weird whataboutisms.
Click to expand...
I think it’s also that Switch Online, Gamepass and PS+ are deliberately not directly comparable in either what they offer or pricing, which leads to misunderstandings and assumptions about the services people don’t use. I expect a lot more from a £60-£120 a year service (Sony tiers) or ~£85 (Gamepass core) than I do from an £18-£35 (Nintendo tiers) one, but even then the tiers and different offerings make it deliberately hard to compare value. People value the stuff they aren’t interested in at zero (I don’t subscribe to any of them at the moment) which is fair enough, but it’s always an individual calculation as to whether the listed content is worth it for them. It’s just a shame that online play, which is increasingly essential or at least part of major games, has been normalised as being locked behind these wider subscription schemes.
 
Last edited:
PixelKnight said:
I think it’s also that Switch Online, Gamepass and PS+ are deliberately not directly comparable in either what they offer or pricing, which leads to misunderstandings and assumptions about the services people don’t use. I expect a lot more from a £60-£120 a year service (Sony tiers) or ~£85 (Gamepass core) than I do from an £18-£35 (Nintendo tiers) one, but even then the tiers and different offerings make it deliberately hard to compare value. People value the stuff they aren’t interested in at zero (I don’t subscribe to any of them at the moment) which is fair enough, but it’s always an individual calculation as to whether the listed content is worth it for them.
Click to expand...
These services obviously offer different features and content at different price points but in this specific context it's not even necessary to compare them. Sony is increasing the base price of its service without adding anything. I feel like everyone should be able to agree that this is bad, no?

PixelKnight said:
It’s just a shame that online play, which is increasingly essential or at least part of major games has been normalised as being locked behind these wider subscription schemes.
Click to expand...
Luckily nowadays people have so many (hugely popular) F2P options that they're not barred completely from online play if they don't subscribe to PS+/XBL/NSO. Of course, many of the paid titles still require it but it's not quite as essential as it was just a gen ago.
 
Their reasoning for a lack of day one games on PS+ makes sense given their business strategy - it'd be nice if they came day and date but with the amount of money going into them thanks to their AAA-only plans it'd be a bit daft of them to lose what are almost guaranteed sales for the bigger franchises.

The price increase for Plus also makes sense for their business strategy but only in so much as it means they're earning more money than they before. Otherwise it's just a bit rubbish. Simply put they can get away with it, so they did it - MS and Nintendo would make the same increase if they could.
 
The PS+ classic game catalogue isn't worth it at all for me. I recently fired up the the PS3 and downloaded all the psone, ps2 and other ps store games that are going to be lost in time when the stores (vita included) get put out to pasture. I'm good there. In addition to not being much of an online gamer it's a pretty easy decision to make. I haven't paid for ps plus in several years.
 
This decision has pushed me away from PlayStation consoles and I'm now looking into getting a new pc. I can't justify $80 a year to play games online when I can do it for free on a gaming PC. Sony seems to have lost the plot.
 
0
Dardan Sandiego said:
These services obviously offer different features and content at different price points but in this specific context it's not even necessary to compare them. Sony is increasing the base price of its service without adding anything. I feel like everyone should be able to agree that this is bad, no?
Click to expand...
Sure, price rise for no added benefit, seems simple enough.
Dardan Sandiego said:
Luckily nowadays people have so many (hugely popular) F2P options that they're not barred completely from online play if they don't subscribe to PS+/XBL/NSO. Of course, many of the paid titles still require it but it's not quite as essential as it was just a gen ago.
Click to expand...
That’s true. It’s always been a bit rich to need to pay for online play locked behind a wider subscription scheme for big titles you’ve paid £60 for, but there were plenty of FTP games around last gen too. It’s always stuck in my craw for games sold at a premium price, when you’d think those games could include a way to get around the sub for that specific title, rather than actually being able to play the game you’ve already paid for online being a selling point of a wider sub. Still, if those FTP games had been around when I was a kid I’d likely have been told by my parents to get on with the free ones or not play at all, while laughing at the idea of £40 NES carts, which probably explains their popularity :D
 
Last edited:
Reinhard Schneider said:
Though i don't agree on the general feeling about PS5 in the thread. The PS4 library by itself already makes it a very valuable machine, and then games like Returnal make the console it. Sure, there's only a few Sony developed PS exclusives, but i bought a PS2 for Lament of Innocence so what do i know.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, both the PS5 and the Xbox Series X may also be a good investment if one is looking for a device that plays 4K BD. Sure, there's standalone players aplenty, but given how long these devices may get the necessary codec support (which for ungodly reasons are necessities to play the damn discs) versus the shelf life of the consoles (my PS3 still gets the occasional update which I assume is just there from stopping it being a bricked BD player).

Beyond that, I agree with this sentiment. If you either skipped on the PS4 like I did or want to retire yours for some reason, the PS5 is a fairly good device.

Reinhard Schneider said:
Also, please save me the PC slander, fami. PC gaming is great.
Click to expand...

Also, this. Yeah, price of entry may be steep at times, but unless you want to play everything at maximum settings etc, a PC isn't that pricey (depending on where you live) and there's a sizeable library to explore beyond just the big guns.
 
Pay more get less

Sony is lucky I went in for the premium tier last February when I dislocated my knee and was out for a few days from work. I'm canceling this over priced service hard.
 
PixelKnight said:
www.gamespot.com

One Of PlayStation's Most Important People, Connie Booth, Has Left The Company After 30+ Years

The co-creator of God of War alleges Connie Booth was fired after PlayStation began work on more live-service games.
www.gamespot.com www.gamespot.com
Click to expand...
Wait a minute, why would devs even believe Connie Booth was behind the GaaS push? I know, execs, but still.

Dardan Sandiego said:
Sony is increasing the base price of its service without adding anything. I feel like everyone should be able to agree that this is bad, no?
Click to expand...
Yeah, absolutely. I’m content to wait for their games to come to Steam. Or borrow my friend’s PS5 lol.
 
0
Starbreaker said:
Streaming services and all the other fluff too. I'm over it.
Click to expand...
I can’t rep this sentence enough. They are all wastes unless you watch them multiple times a week.

I wish my wife would cancel Hulu and Netflix. She stopped using them. We still have Disney+ and I buy as many DVD’s as I can for cheap in the hope of getting her to cancel them. I never subscribed to Spotify as I buy records and CD’s when I want to listen to something. I had an ESPN+ subscription and canceled it when Major League Soccer moved to its own package. (I do have the MLS season pass as I watch multiple games a week so I do get my money’s worth, also I view sports differently as they are more like a consumable with a short lifespan rather than a video game that you’ll still have fun with until the day you leave this earth) I do not subscribe to Nintendo online.

The point of an entertainment subscription is to take money out of your wallet regardless of whether they make content you like. Joke is on them though as they won’t ever make money on streaming and the software bros will get paid regardless.
 
lemonfresh said:
even if we are all crapping on sony they will probably still be top of the charts on np all of next year and there is nothing we can do about it
Click to expand...
True.

You can make good money short term by shaking down a loyal legacy fanbase. But what comes next? When does PlayStation have its Anthem or Halo Infinite moment? You know, the moment the market decides it doesn’t want another GAAS or more mediocre Halo games that don’t live up to the original trilogy?
 
Old Sorta Fan said:
I can’t rep this sentence enough. They are all wastes unless you watch them multiple times a week.

I wish my wife would cancel Hulu and Netflix. She stopped using them. We still have Disney+ and I buy as many DVD’s as I can for cheap in the hope of getting her to cancel them. I never subscribed to Spotify as I buy records and CD’s when I want to listen to something. I had an ESPN+ subscription and canceled it when Major League Soccer moved to its own package. (I do have the MLS season pass as I watch multiple games a week so I do get my money’s worth, also I view sports differently as they are more like a consumable with a short lifespan rather than a video game that you’ll still have fun with until the day you leave this earth) I do not subscribe to Nintendo online.

The point of an entertainment subscription is to take money out of your wallet regardless of whether they make content you like. Joke is on them though as they won’t ever make money on streaming and the software bros will get paid regardless.
Click to expand...

Its a bubble not unlike what AI will be. They will burst then come back in a better form. Right now we are in the stage of streaming where companies need to start profiting off them. This is just the same old story with corporations. Go in red to Launch product at dirt cheap -> Invest and double down -> Realizes they aren't getting enough money and raise prices -> boom
 
Josh5890 said:
While I'm not a big fan of some of Sony's decisions, I disagree that the PlayStation brand is doomed.

They never had any "de facto" exclusivity with FIFA or Call of Duty. EA FC (formerly FIFA), is being bundled with PS5's across the world. Alot of people associate that franchise with Sony and it won't change any time soon. Yes, Sony is going to lose Call of Duty marketing rights after next year's game, but the game will continue to appear on the PlayStation ecosystem for at least a decade. People buy it because their friends game on the same system. Everyone isn't going to run out and buy Xbox's next year just because the tv commercials have a different console brand at the end. The day may come when Call of Duty is no longer on PlayStation, and that will be a huge deal when it happens, but it isn't any time soon.

Yes, Sony's output has slowed down because of the growing length of game development (not to mention COVID happened). That said, the games that they do put out are almost always rated highly and well received by fans. PS Studios is known for its quality. If you want to play those games at launch, you can only play it on PlayStation. As far as the quantity goes, this year is definitely lighter but last year they released 4 big games. With 16 different studios working on titles (some are working on multiple projects), they are going to come out at some point.

GAAS is definitely a hot button topic, but there are two truths. One, the most played games on PlayStation are usually some sort of GAAS/live service game. Second, there is a lot of money to be made with those games. Sony makes billions off microtransactions every year off the likes of Fortnite and GTA, and that is just taking a ~30% cut. It makes business sense for Sony to take a wack at those types of games again. Sony made plenty of multiplayer games in the PS3 era, and many of them were well received. Lastly, just because it is a GAAS project doesn't mean it is automatically a loot shooter. We haven't seen gameplay for most of those projects, let alone see them get announced.

Sony has been positioning PlayStation to be a premium brand, like Apple. And for the most part it seems to be working. Their $70 games keep breaking records. The $200 premium controller has been a big hit, as noted in the monthy NPD/Circana reports. The system went through a price hike in many markets last year, and console sales haven't slowed down. Right now there are ~45m Ps Plus subscribers. Even if 11m drop their sub because of the price hike (won't happen), Sony still breaks even. Do I like that it is getting more expensive to game? Hell no. Is it working for Sony? Absolutely.

Lastly, I disagree that the "glory days" of PlayStation are a long time ago. Yes, Sony lost a ton of market share with the PS3 for many reasons, but they rebounded very well with the PS4. In that same interview as the PS Plus talk, they mentioned that they are expecting to sell the most PlayStation consoles ever this year. Their market share over Xbox has increased since the beginning of the generation. The PlayStation brand is still flourishing just fine.

So while tomorrow is promised to no one, Sony is currently in a very good position for now. Yes, Microsoft is building their first party umbrella, and that will make the next generation very interesting, but it isn't doom and gloom for Sony. As long as their studios continue to make great games and the third party support continues, they won't die off.
Click to expand...
My compliments on your well reasoned counterpoints.
 
Old Sorta Fan said:
True.

You can make good money short term by shaking down a loyal legacy fanbase. But what comes next? When does PlayStation have its Anthem or Halo Infinite moment? You know, the moment the market decides it doesn’t want another GAAS or more mediocre Halo games that don’t live up to the original trilogy?
Click to expand...

They’ll have about five or six of those moments coming in the next two years.
 
lemonfresh said:
even if we are all crapping on sony they will probably still be top of the charts on npd all of next year and there is nothing we can do about it
Click to expand...
This is the same argument people use to dismiss legit criticism towards Nintendo and their boneheaded business decisions or the shoddy quality of recent Pokémon releases.
 
Reinhard Schneider said:
Also, please save me the PC slander, fami. PC gaming is great.
Click to expand...
PC gamers when their 10,000 dollar rig has a millisecond of stutter
guaton-computadora.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom