to me, a platform holder has one responsibility every generation:For $300 million, risk free games?
Feels like it. They might be only one pumping those out unless GAAS takes over their studios completely.
Spiderman 2 hasn't even been out a year. It seems the problem is these companies want an immediate RoI and profit within a release window. While new games probably have front loaded sales, they can make money well after their initial release date and then there are streaming rights or service based revenue for putting on gamepass or psn.
Stop preaching to your core demographic;
Stop acting like you hate them;
Stop making games longer and bigger - your players don't want this;
Stop developing games you think will work, and develop games the market wants;
There's a massive disconnect here. We want to make what we want, and take the risk people might not like it. As opposed to we will make what the market wants and it will sell well.
It reminds me of the last few years before the PS4 and XB1 where a lot of games became stale because they all felt like reskins. We're back here now imo.
Plenty of shitty games out there with MTXs. It’s another revenue stream where they don’t have to raise the retail price of the games It’s either MTXs or games start costing more at retail. I’d rather have optional MTXs than pay $89 for a game.I remember reading in a computer gaming magazine of the '80s complaining about the lack of innovation and creativity, saying that almost everything were fighting, puzzle or racing games.
Since then, people kept complaining every single generation about lack of innovation and creativity. When the reality is that every new generation we got more genres, subgenres and game types, new game types, new business models or even new platform types to play games differently.
Obviously companies want to have profit, so they normally do what they think will sell more. And human beings normally reject new and different things, normally prefer things they already know. So big companies, who invest a lot of money typically bet on safer stuff, what already works. But there's always small innovations or creative mixes, plus also some kamikaze devs or people who wrongly assume their crazy new idea is going to work and even if very different new ideas normally tank, a few succed. So later they are used as reference for future games.
Because most of the top performing games have them. If most top performing games would have pink elephants, then some time later every game would feature pink elephants.
It's table-stakes though - not a differentiating factor. Basically middleware exists as an entry point - you use it to get started, not because it will help sales.Looking to rise of the ronin people depend more on state of the Art tech as they admit.
Yea the industry has been cyclical that way for decades now. It's no coincidence that the same cycles are also punctuated by rise in middleware usage - UEs hype cycles are almost exactly following the pattern too.It reminds me of the last few years before the PS4 and XB1 where a lot of games became stale because they all felt like reskins. We're back here now imo.
There are always have been tons of shitty games. With or without mtx.Plenty of shitty games out there with MTXs. It’s another revenue stream where they don’t have to raise the retail price of the games It’s either MTXs or games start costing more at retail. I’d rather have optional MTXs than pay $89 for a game.
Spiderman 2 hasn't even been out a year.
I love longer games when the combat/core gameplay is good, give memore.Stop making games longer and bigger - your players don't want this;
Players’ increasingly high demands for graphics and game play
So good games have to be AAA? I'm confused.It costs a lot to make a good AAA game. Any AAA game, for that matter. I’m not sure where you’re going with this.
And like he’s said, we’ve seen some good AAA games fail to sell very well.
What are you trying to say here?to me, a platform holder has one responsibility every generation:
to make one new IP that can be as successful/big as the previous one.
sony has always delivered.
regarding GaaS, that pivot is already a failed one.
So good games have to be AAA? I'm confused.
The very idea of AAA implies huge costs. Either make them good or don't make them at all.
Stop cherry picking what I've said to try make your point.
Either make them good or don't make them at all.
but what is considered a "good" game?
Alot of good games dont sell.
GaaS won't take over completely. It's in addition to AAA, to create revenue for continued funding of said AAA production and to keep people playing within their ecosystem in between AAA releases.For $300 million, risk free games?
Feels like it. They might be only one pumping those out unless GAAS takes over their studios completely.
So they should make more GaaS games you mean?A good game is the one that gives people what they want.
Execs and devs just need to get out of their bubble, interact with ACTUAL gamers, learn from their target audiences, and act accordingly.
This is why the most profitable gachas are making hundreds of millions. They are constantly in touch with their communities, even before releasing the game. If they have to make an overhaul, they do it. Another example is Helldivers 2. That's the right approach. Compare that to Rocksteady / Suicide Squad.
Arrogance makes you broke.
AAA single player is reliant on big IP to sell.That's no new IP.
No. The thread title and much of the OP is about spiraling costs of AAA games leading to publishers and devs choosing to play it safe. That’s the context, and you’re the one cherry picking and going off point.
I promise you, nobody goes into making a $100m - $200m game Intending it to be a bad game.
I'm saying a new IP as big(if not bigger) that the previous, that somewhat defines that Gen for Play Station.What are you trying to say here?
Should I expect something like The Last Guardian made with $300 million budget from them?
Or something we have seen before but a new lick of paint.
If i were to bet, it would be latter they will come up with.
"The gaming industry has not grown to accomodate budgets"
We don't believe in innovation unless it's prohibitively expensive. We lack the imagination to innovate in ways that don't bankrupt us.“We want to do big, new things,” Vincke said on a panel.
yet Sony keeps creating new AAA single player IPs.AAA single player is reliant on big IP to sell.
Multiplayer live service is not.
Players’ increasingly high demands for graphics and game play
Sonys production of "new AAA single player IPs" has slowed to a crawl. Their last was...Days Gone in 2019? Their next will be in 2025 or 2026 from Naughty Dog or Santa Monica?yet Sony keeps creating new AAA single player IPs.
I dunno what's your point.
This is what we get for shitting on and criticizing games that release and aren't fucking 40+ hours.
If gamers didn't shit on games for being 8-10 hours long, we would not have this problem.
But nope, games have to be 1million hours long, provide millions of hours of entertainment, for 70 bucks.
Now everything has to be a 1million hour long Open World. Hell, even Resident Evil is going open world now.
We deserve this.
The entire industry has slow down their output of any kind of game, not only AAA single player titlesSonys production of "new AAA single player IPs" has slowed to a crawl.
so? everyone is in the same timeline. The second half of the PS5 Gen Sony should be able to release 2-4 of these gamesTheir last was...Days Gone in 2019? Their next will be in 2025 or 2026 from Naughty Dog or Santa Monica?
We're going to exit the PS5 generation where 90% of Sonys big new IP will be multiplayer Live service games. AAA single player isn't worth the risk.
contradiction much?AAA single player is reliant on big IP to sell.
Multiplayer live service is not.
GaaS won't take over completely. It's in addition to AAA, to create revenue for continued funding of said AAA production and to keep people playing within their ecosystem in between AAA releases.
Why are some people still obtuse to everything Sony said?
They took risks in PS4 era with Horizon, Ghost etc new IP open world games from studios that dont make them.I'm saying a new IP as big(if not bigger) that the previous, that somewhat defines that Gen for Play Station.
PS1: Gran Turismo
PS2: GoW
PS3: Uncharted/TLoU
PS4: Horizon
PS5: New IP from santa Monica/ND or another studio?...we shall see
I'm saying a new IP as big(if not bigger) that the previous, that somewhat defines that Gen for Play Station.
PS1: Gran Turismo
PS2: GoW
PS3: Uncharted/TLoU
PS4: Horizon
PS5: New IP from santa Monica/ND or another studio?...we shall see
Yes, but this is just make-believe by GaaS-haters.Plans can change. Especially if their GAAS initiatives all exceed expectations. They would be fool to not pursue it.
Its a business after all.
uh? cuz games are taking longer to make FOR EVERYONE.Four years in and you can’t even name a new ip. Literally proves what everyone’s saying.
that's why Herman said they need to revaluate how Playstation oparatesNew IP from SSM/ ND might come, how much new stuff they pack in remains to be seen.
So they should make more GaaS games you mean?
I rather play indie games if thats the case
If they can generate enough money with GaaS, chances are higher that they have enough to fund additional A and AA projects.So they should make more GaaS games you mean?
I rather play indie games if thats the case
According to Saito, he's working on a real video game and they hope to talk about this some time this year. Dunno whether it's gonna be a new Nier or something else, tho.Taro is stuck in mobile game hell since Automata.
The biggest game so far this gen (Baldur’s Gate 3) only cost 100M to make, if some are paying more than that then they should really reflect on where their money is going.
Baldur's Gate 3 budget including marketing must have been beyond $100M and isn't the biggest game of this generation.
Nah. In days of yore, PlayStation would regularly create new AAA single player IP which would become big. That has since slowed to a crawl.The entire industry has slow down their output of any kind of game, not only AAA single player titles
AAA single player is reliant on big (established) IP to sell. Think: Star Wars, Spider Man, Harry Potter, Zelda etc.contradiction much?