this belongs on the ps5 tombstone (whenever it eventually appears)...
I bought Spiderman 2. it sucked. I didn't review it on Metacritic or PSN user score (I actually tried to rate a game on PSN yesterday and couldn't figure out how lol).
I don't think they are the same. Not even close. A 3rd party strategy is most likely to be very different for Sony. For one, there's no way they abandon their bread and butter...the console market. Secondly, Sony is much more deeply rooted in single player games. Going 3rd party with these games just doesn't make as much sense. Finally, having the largest install base for the caliber of games they offer means there is less of an incentive for them to go else where as Xbox, who stood to profit greatly from bringing their games to PS5.
Could work given that they haven't abandoned PS4 even five years into the generation.
Didn't you know? Approximately 400 people total worked on Spider Man 2 and all they did was build them polygons, textures and hand trace rays! At one point, even the janitors had to pitch in! The only department that had time for other things was mind-controlled by Sweet Baby.
The problem is that, 1. hundreds of people are still required to make those kinds of games a reality and 2. HFW, GT7 and GOWR didn't particularly take that long to make and still couldn't be made exclusives to a single console. And it's not like any of those games had difficulties in recouping costs, either. I think their cross -gen strategy has worked so far.
2024-2026 will have seen the likes of Helldivers 2, Rise of the Ronin, Stellar Blade, Astro Bot (tentpole game, but not as far as development costs go), Lego Horizon Adventures, Midnight Murder Club, Lost Soul Aside, Saros and Marvel Tōkon: Fighting Souls. I don't think SIE has necessarily been lacking in efforts outside of the AAA heavy hitters spectrum after 2022-2023.
It's hard to compare SIE with Nintendo here because Nintendo consoles are usually driven on first-party software, while PlayStation consoles are mostly driven on third-party software, and heck, not even Nintendo is lacking of cross-gen efforts these days (Metroid Prime 4: Beyond, Rhythm Heaven Groove and Tomodachi Life: Living the Dream). In the case of SIE, increasing development costs became a way bigger factor harder to ignore, and by the looks of it, those games being cross-gen haven't certainly impacted the long tail of PS5's hardware sales.
Sounds like a PS3 game.
That gen destroyed this one
I disagree on one point here. Make 60fps games and stop trying to go so over the top with visual assets that 30fps is necessary. 60fps just plays so much better anyway.
Thats literally what they have been doing this whole gen...which is why its all the more baffling where the money went.
This is what I'm wondering. Where did the resources go? Where was the change if not in the product?
This post doesn't mean anything. The PS5 has a similar toolchain to the PS4, and devs aren't forced to use tech like RT, they can make "PS4 level" games on the PS5 basically the same way they did on PS4.
For what it's worth, I don't really have issues with ongoing cross-gen support. Long tail support for PlayStation consoles has always been a hallmark, so I am completely okay with it here. It would also not be as much of an issue had we managed to get a steady cadence of first party PS5 exclusive titles after the cross gen period had ended, I think that is where Sony faltered this generation (although, as I believe we've discussed previously, I think their 2024 in particular was a lot better as a year than it gets credit for, and that's with the stink of Concord)
Yup, like I said, I give them credit for going back to this well the last few years. My only hope is this trend continues. I do think Sony potentially realizes that there is no alternative but to start putting out games with quicker turnaround times as well, so I am optimistic (but cautiously so)
I meant the Nintendo and Sony comparison only to illustrate that both of these companies have performed well as first parties in the past by keeping their eyes on the overall health of the platform, rather than splitting hairs on the profitability of each individual project. Now of course, there are a lot of differences in how the two companies function, Nintendo is first party driven. Sony is third party driven – but to be honest, I would argue that is even more of a reason for Sony to be able to absorb costs better. They are guaranteed the revenue and adoption and uptake from third party developers and consumers, that takes the pressure off of their first party projects to substantiate themselves financially even more. Sony also has the backing of (by being a) gigantic multibillion dollar corporation, so of course, they are more than capable of tanking that hit to promote the overall health of their platform. This is the one area where I am unsure we will see them take the right steps going forward - but I can hope.
I think a PS4 level AAA game in higher resolution would cost at least 50-75% more than the PS4 game did 10 years ago.
well, basically, he's suggesting that sony would do well to incorporate an acknowledgement of the reality of diminishing returns into their business plan...
How? How would anyone slag off a game that looks like TLOU2 or GOW2018 or RDR2 or Horizon Forbidden West as "outdated looking"? Expectations are completely miscalibrated if that is the case.
People are going to believe what they want but the 400+ million is believed by some who would know these things
Its crazy you would think Sony has delivered leading tech showcases this gen by what the people write here. They barely upgraded their last gen pipelines the improvements have basically been ultra settings...meanwhile other devs have eclipsed them with nanite equivilant tech with rtgi with the same budgets as before. Maybe if they actually implemented rtgi they wouldnt have to waste so much time baking light and finetuning assets for specific conditions did anyone think of that?
That depends Sony,s games haven't been much better looking, but devs have delivered Wukong, ,Avatar and Assassin's Creed etc that are significant improvements. We didnt reach some magical pinnacle in realtime visuals after which we need to triple the budget thats simply a case of bad management. Witcher 4 and gta6 also showcase that the hardware is capable maybe if Sony devs implemented rtgi they wouldnt need to waste ages baking lighting and finetuning assets for specific conditions etc.
He started to implement two solutions when he still was in charge of first party games:
Every AAA company from anywhere in the world has this issue. If they don't have it is because they don't make AAA games.
Games like Death Stranding 2, Gran Turismo 7, GoWR, HFW or Rift Apart were tech showcases when released, looking better than any previous game of their type.
I don't know. The likes of Fromsoft and Capcom are hiring and increasing dev earnings instead of laying people off.
This is not true, over 3500 people worked in Spider-Man 2.
They rare exceptions, Fromsoft won the lottery with Elden Ring and most Capcom AAA games (there are a few exceptions like Exoprimal or Dragons Dogma 2) have been selling better than ever in recent years.
AI. AI will change it all soon.
You say that, but as soon as there's a swathe of AA or Indie games shown at a State of Play, you have hundreds, if not thousands of people screaming "MID, PLAYSTATION IS DEAD" etc.
When it comes to big media costs in games or movies, I get a sense with all the endless budgets floating around you might as well go big or go home. And a bigger budget gets bigger star power, better CGI, better voice work and better marketing. So the minimum floor of sales should be a lot more than a cheap ass project that nobody knows about. It'll cost a lot more to make, but the sales "should" trend to a lot more. The overall risk/reward ratio is high though. Like a gambler betting a lot of money. Win a lot. Lose a lot.
The price of living everyone is charging more money . It's not that more work is being done it's just people needing bigger pay just to survive now.
I stand corrected!
Not sure what you're talking about:
Nah, people people used to know budgets of AAA and AA games know that saying that Concord did cost $400M until launch not counting the acquisition is just a bad joke.
The marketing department will tell you they cannot market such a game, and downgrade their expected sales for such a game, the CEO will read their report, and decline to fund the project.
The game would had been better suited as a fun platformer than an ultra hard side shooter, but among the best art I've seen the past decade is Cuphead. And googling it, the entire game only had a couple dozen people making it. I dont know how many were the artists, but it goes to show awesome art doesn't have to come from a team of 100-200 people doing Unreal Engine 5 raytraced graphics.
