It's not that it peaked.
Bloodborne is Sony's Sonic Unleashed.
When you only made $1.6 billion in profits despite having record-breaking revenue in 2023 while your closest competitor just posted $4.02 billion in profits, then someone has to step in to rectify all of those issues.
There was a time when Sony said the generation didn't start until they said so. But this time around they seem to be waiting on Switch 2.
That really depends on what the new PS leadership does to fix what Jim Ryan broke. It's clear that he should never have been put in charge of the division.
Revenue is just a mirage because their profit margin is dreadful, and you can't hide it forever with record-breaking revenue headlines while posting low profit income at the same time.
I feel like this a problem that goes beyond even Jim Ryan and has to due with the constant push for pure power and the increasing costs that come with it
I also believe Nintendo's revenue is deflated and operating margin % a bit higher as they only report their 30% cut of 3rd party sales, while Sony reports the full $60 or $70 price of a 3rd party game as revenue.
Phew! For a second there I thought you were going to say something like "I'm completely satisfied with this gen thanks to the same third party selection that you use to hype up your PC"
And of course being happy with that is not allowedYeah The Short Message sucked ass. I appreciated some of the things it tried to do, but it was overall not very good. I actually wrote about it here. As for the NeoBards comment, I am excited to see what comes out of Silent Hill f because it doesn't really look like Silent Hill, or rather looks like a new take on Silent Hill, which might just be what this series needs right now ... but I'm skeptical. Also I've heard that apparently The Short Message is connected? I'm not sure.I heard The Short Message was cheeksI think I might've already said this the other day, but between it and the Silent Hill 2 remake looking rough, the responsibility falls on NeoBards (famed developers of Resident Evil Resistance and Re:Verse) to give us a worthwhile modern Silent Hill experience
How the turns have tabled.
This is wild to me, I really feel like we're on the beginning of the gen and it's been 4 years already? I think the main explanation is that we haven't seen any flagship title to herald in the new gen and the exclusives just didn't move the needle: Demon's Souls is a remaster of an old title so that instantly diminishes it impact as a "breakthrough" title. Spider-man 2 or Ratchet and Clank didn't show anything too groundbreaking either and instant load times aren't anything too big either. It's time to admit that this gen just lacks any real reason to be: "More power" just isn't enough at the level we're now.
The race for power had an end and we're closing on it. Of course consoles can get more powerful but at the level we're at, it's good enough for most people. A strong art direction and imaginative artstyle can compete with the graphical powerhouse games in they impact they cause. This is more or less the way that Nintendo has been following: Focusing on a strong artstyle and use the current power to bring it up without going too crazy, while taking advantage of the "free" power upgrades they get as technology advances. Build a strong game, based on gameplay and it'll be eternal. That's why Mario or Zelda are still blockbusters after 40 years, while stuff like Gears or Halo have fallen to the side. There are more remasters than main entries in The Last of Us series, it's as if they really don't know what to do with it apart of improving the graphics (yeah the remasters have other changes, but those are not the main hook). Make your studios crunch, then apply massive layoffs and the costs will only rise higher and higher as you need more people to do the impossible. This is a stark contrast with Nintendo eating crow during the WiiU and taking the hit to keep the talent in the company, the same talent that has later produced Splatoon, BotW, Mario Odyssey, Mario Wonder...They now have more capable people, with more knowledge, working on better conditions, with a long-term plan and projects with realistic scopes that won't get everybody laid off once their part in the game is done.
Totally agree.
This infinite growth mindset is truly vile and despicable. I really like Nintendo's more conservative philosophy in that regard. They're doing really well and have had a great pipeline of game releases these last few years.
What I don't get, is why games always have to get bigger and bigger.
While you personally might not be, the market as a whole is. Big games with an open world to explore are very popular and sell very well indeed. Gamers want these types of games. The issue is that they've become astronomically expensive to make, and they aren't selling enough to make the effort worthwhile. So publishers are now between a rock and a hard place where consumers are expecting massive open worlds with amazing graphics, but providing consumers with these games costs so much it may no longer be worth it.
I agree. I’d rather have 3 games that look decent and take 2 or 3 years to produce than 1 game that is the most photo realistic looking thing ever and takes 6
As usual, the problem is never aspiring to growth per se, but having unrealistic, unreasonable and unsustainable expectations of it. Development costs have exploded because this technical race is not rational anymore. A home console doesn't have to be a top-of-the-range gamer's PC, and it doesn't cost the same anyway. Games take an inordinate amount of time to develop, not because we ask more of them - that's normal, ongoing technological progress - but because we ask too much of them at this point of what affordable tech is. For me, the best illustration of this race into the void is the emergence of mid-gen consoles, which make no sense other than to fuel this ridiculous headlong rush.
I’d honestly say it goes a bit beyond that as these big cinematic and narrative driven action heavy experiences are just expensive to make in general, even if they weren’t pursuing realistic visuals. The games sell super well so they’re definitely profitable but shareholders are always gonna wanna see some growth. Their smaller budget games are much less frequent and don’t get anywhere near the same amount of sales so here we are
In that both games suck? True!
After the slog that is the antiseptic Astro's Playroom, I'd just hope a full length Astro platformer has at least something approaching a personality.
Wait, what? I really liked Astro’s Playroom! It wasn’t the best thing ever but one of the best packed in launch games I’ve played that demonstrates what makes the controller unique while celebrating PlayStation’s history. Some of the gimmicks weren’t the best but I’d say it overall got the job done. I’m sure a full on Astro game wouldn’t need to focus on controller gimmicks so that shouldn’t be a worry
Great example of this disconnect that always sticks in my mind is this embarassment of a video from Arlo years ago:
I mean it was an extremely bland delivery of PlayStation fanservice that served well as a controller tutorial. But I was not exactly enthralled by references to old games like Pain or Final Fantasy VII being present with one sword prop in the environment.
Honestly, fair. For me, the references being cutely re-enacted by the little robots and getting PlayStation collectables did give it charm but I can see someone finding a lot of it very corporate and sanitized. But, really, these sorts of references and what not only really make sense for a game like Astrobot’s Playroom. I don’t think you’d see much of a focus on that in a full on $60 game
You don't get it. Nintendo is EXPLOITINNG its rabid fanbase by releasing their reasonably scoped great looking and playing games on under powered hardware.
When I drop the price of my $500 box I was already manufacturing at a loss to $300, I am doing consumers a favor, obviously.
