Support NeoGAF

[drganon]

Only problem is word of mouth only gets you so far, eventually population will fall off take fall guys for instance. It ended up needing to get onto more platforms, if that was due to decline or that was the plan all along idk. I would say it benefited from the extra players a great deal.

I fully believe that it will start off with their gaas games and then they will start to release their big single player games. May take a couple sp to come late and underperform, but either way it will happen.

If you're implying Sony porting sp games to pc day one, I highly doubt it, but at least its within the realm of possibility. But if you're also implying ports to Xbox, you're out to lunch.

 

[Neofire]

If you're implying Sony porting sp games to pc day one, I highly doubt it, but at least its within the realm of possibility. But if you're also implying ports to Xbox, you're out to lunch.

He believes that because that's what he is hoping/wants to happen. He has zero data or even statements to support his claims.

If I remember correctly every single release on the PC has "under performed" except Helldivers 2 and we all know why and it isn't just because it released day one.

 

[RGB'D]

Why would Microsoft's games do dramatically better on PlayStation than they have on Xbox consoles? I'm not asking this because "I" think they won't do better, or even dramatically better. I just want to know why you feel they will.

Thinking back to SEGA, one of the few examples I can think of for them, once they went fully multiplatform, when an IP did better on a competing platform than their own was Virtua Fighter. VF4 and VF4: Evo were pretty big hits in the West, first time for a VF game honestly, and being on PS2 helped a lot there.

But that didn't repeat with VF5, despite that having a first (and for a long time, better) release on the 360, which dominated the US & UK that gen. Something else to consider is, the Wii U itself was an abject failure yet Nintendo's own games did very well on that system with extremely high attach rates. So it can be argued that saying MS's games, in terms of sales, have been stifled by only being on Xbox console-wise, may not be true because Nintendo's own games did very well even on dead systems like the Wii U.

If there is some "default" factor that could help MS's games sell better on PS than Xbox consoles just by virtue of being there and existing, it's probably because Sony haven't made their console irrelevant to a large group by doing Day 1 on PC for all of their games. So by virtue of that, there are more PS console owners, and more who exclusively or primarily use the console over something like PC.

Meaning a larger base for Microsoft to sell their games to with less crossover of having already accessed those games on Xbox OR PC.

It was a hypothetical, not a prediction. I don't think they will blow up. I could see decent attach to grounded and SOT. But it was in response to the previous poster arguing against bringing games to PC day and date. Their rationale was that Xbox is dying because they started porting games to PC; I disagreed with that and tried to illustrate why they aren't the same with a hypothetical situation.

 

[MonkD]

Sure, why not?

It's not like it would happen over night. The server issues should've been solved either technically or due to player drop off. If you're worried about having to play with worse hardware youre already stuck with PC

 

[mckmas8808]

Sure, why not?

Because Sony doesn't need to do it. Why help out a competitor, when doing that will hurt you in the end?

 

[Varteras]

 

[MonkD]

Because Sony doesn't need to do it. Why help out a competitor, when doing that will hurt you in the end?

I don't work for Sony. But I do have friends who play Xbox, so I have nothing to lose.

I thought the question was aimed at us players, not shareholders. I doubt Helldivers 2 is selling that many consols regardless. Would you disagree?

 

[HeWhoWalks]

I don't work for Sony. But I do have friends who play Xbox, so I have nothing to lose.

I thought the question was aimed at us players, not shareholders. I doubt Helldivers 2 is selling that many consols regardless. Would you disagree?

Microsoft can just build their own Helldivers-like game.

 

[MonkD]

Microsoft can just build their own Helldivers-like game.

But I don't want to play their shitty knockoffs. I'd rather just crossplay with my buddies.

 

[HeWhoWalks]

But I don't want to play their shitty knockoffs. I'd rather just crossplay with my buddies.

Oh well. That's the way the shit flushes.

 

[mckmas8808]

I don't work for Sony. But I do have friends who play Xbox, so I have nothing to lose.

I thought the question was aimed at us players, not shareholders. I doubt Helldivers 2 is selling that many consols regardless. Would you disagree?

Yes, I disagree. I think HD2 can sell many PS5s. When I say many, I means in the 10s of thousands. What has Microsoft done to "deserve" Helldivers 2 exactly?

But I don't want to play their shitty knockoffs. I'd rather just crossplay with my buddies.

Not to be "THAT GUY", but they could buy a PS5. Problem solved.

 

[Skifi28]

Microsoft can just build their own Helldivers-like game.

 

[IDappa]

If you're implying Sony porting sp games to pc day one, I highly doubt it, but at least its within the realm of possibility. But if you're also implying ports to Xbox, you're out to lunch.

You can doubt it all you want but bloods on the water now after helldivers. These companies want money you could imagine what they’re thinking they could get with day and date big so games. Ports to Xbox pretty unlikely, I think they should bring their gaas games over for the added player counts and revenue. Who knows what the future holds though.

 

[IDappa]

He believes that because that's what he is hoping/wants to happen. He has zero data or even statements to support his claims.

If I remember correctly every single release on the PC has "under performed" except Helldivers 2 and we all know why and it isn't just because it released day one.

You obviously haven’t read my posts. I don’t hope or want anything. It doesn’t bother me. I’ve been gaming my whole life and have always owned every system around. You also didn’t read when I said underperformed I meant didn’t meet expectations.

Can you tell me the differing factor of helldivers success compared to let’s say Spider-Man, On pc? Other than day one release and the hype behind it?. You guys just seem butthurt when anyone even hints at new approaches to their business strategies. Seems like you guys are hoping and wanting them to stay delayed off pc also. I’m just looking at the success of helldivers and the CEO’s comments. Can’t wait for the meltdown of people like you.

 

[Neofire]

Yes, I disagree. I think HD2 can sell many PS5s. When I say many, I means in the 10s of thousands. What has Microsoft done to "deserve" Helldivers 2 exactly?



Not to be "THAT GUY", but they could buy a PS5. Problem solved.

From my observation, there are a few vocal individuals that want every game on consoles on PC and that's cool to want it but looking at the Xbox platform that strategy does not help consoles as a whole. It cannibalizes unit sales, which is the gateway into their respective brands. The more Sony and Microsoft loses marketshare the less of a reason to pour billions into R&D for a new consoles and a couple million sales on PC aren't going to make up for that. The PlayStation brand is PSN+, the streaming service and the Hardware which is why it's my preferred platform and I don't want that to be put in jeopardy because of a few PC players that want to have their cake and eat it too at the expense of other platforms.

 

[mckmas8808]

From my observation, there are a few vocal individuals that want every game on consoles on PC and that's cool to want it but looking at the Xbox platform that strategy does not help consoles as a whole. It cannibalizes unit sales, which is the gateway into their respective brands. The more Sony and Microsoft loses marketshare the less of a reason to pour billions into R&D for a new consoles and a couple million sales on PC aren't going to make up for that. The PlayStation brand is PSN+, the streaming service and the Hardware which is why it's my preferred platform and I don't want that to be put in jeopardy because of a few PC players that want to have their cake and eat it too at the expense of other platforms.

Yeah, I'm convinced some of these PC players actively want consoles to die.

 

[CamHostage]

I mean... do PS5 players even know that Xbox exists...?

I'd be fine with it if it ever happened (provided the servers could keep up, which I assume would be less of a problem by the time that bell might ring) but exclusives are how they are for reasons. Helldivers might not be popping quite so fiercely if it wasn't targeted so well for its audience and hadn't created an aura of needing to get into it.

Arrowhead Game Studio's own company motto, curiously enough, is, "A game for everyone is a game for no one." Some get to get, some gotta get something else.

 

[Blood Borne]

Man do we really need to explain to adults on why Exclusives exist? I honestly always thought it's a pretty easy explanation that doesn't need 300 different hoops to jump across and justify their existence.

They know why exclusives exist, they’re simply just doing Microsoft’s bidding. Make no mistake, all these people that are pushing this anti exclusive agenda are just either Microsoft fanboys or they’re actually paid/affiliated with Microsoft.
More so, this also reveals that Microsoft is indeed going multiplatform. They’re already getting their lackeys to convince their fans on why multi platform is a good strategy.

Tinfoil hat: By pushing the anti exclusive agenda and narrative, when Microsoft exits the hardware business, they’ll use that to sue Sony for monopoly, and try to get the courts to force Sony to allow other digital stores on PlayStation hardware, thereby getting Game Pass on PlayStation.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

a so called "unisensei" on tweeter had an epic meltown agains Xbox Shills.

 

[jroc74]

It's cute how "PS5 fans" are not talking about porting Helldivers to Nintendo, but they only want the game on Xbox.

It is so beautiful how Nintendo is mostly left out of the "exclusives need to die!!" debates.

Lovely. Marvelous.

 

[Katatonic]

Dude says whatever and has no shame. He'd make a good politician.

 

[graywolf323]

Dude says whatever and has no shame. He'd make a good politician.

nah, but he’d make a good press secretary for Phil Spencer (who definitely would make a good politician)

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Only problem is word of mouth only gets you so far, eventually population will fall off take fall guys for instance. It ended up needing to get onto more platforms, if that was due to decline or that was the plan all along idk. I would say it benefited from the extra players a great deal.

I fully believe that it will start off with their gaas games and then they will start to release their big single player games. May take a couple sp to come late and underperform, but either way it will happen.

Edit. When I say under perform I mean not hit their expectations…..

What big SP games are going to underperform on the console when stuff like Spiderman 2 is doing 10+ million?

If the SP games start underperforming on console, that would be more reflective of a quality decline (in either game design, polish, or both), and just bringing that game to more platforms isn't going to magically result in a giant surge of more sales.

Doesn't even really delve into some of the issues with concurrent console/PC AAA software development such as increased development time (console players wait longer to get the game), more Day 1 bugs (less optimization resources per platform ahead of simultaneous launches), etc.

It is so beautiful how Nintendo is mostly left out of the "exclusives need to die!!" debates.

Lovely. Marvelous.

There was also the recent mobileindustry.biz (Gameindustry.biz sister website?) writing that piece on Apple Arcade "suffering" or what-have-you. Ironic part there being most of the problems they were mentioning, apply to Game Pass, yet apparently no one connected the dots in the article so the fanatics who stan for Game Pass obviously won't, either.

How convenient the gaming strategies of the two companies leading their respective segments of the gaming industry are coming under fire, and both just happen to also be direct competitors for Microsoft

You ain't gotta talk about "users" at all. If you want to call out someone you think is out of line then have at it. There is no call for "sony pony" bullshit any more than "xbot" bullshit. You are going to get yourself banned either way.

Damn was this prophetic or what?

 

[Krieger]

Xbox puts more effort into astroturfing than actually creating games. And now their CEO has to publicly port beg for games from the competition. If that isn't pathetic/pitiful/deplorable then I don't know.

 

[IDappa]

What big SP games are going to underperform on the console when stuff like Spiderman 2 is doing 10+ million?

If the SP games start underperforming on console, that would be more reflective of a quality decline (in either game design, polish, or both), and just bringing that game to more platforms isn't going to magically result in a giant surge of more sales.

Doesn't even really delve into some of the issues with concurrent console/PC AAA software development such as increased development time (console players wait longer to get the game), more Day 1 bugs (less optimization resources per platform ahead of simultaneous launches), etc.



There was also the recent mobileindustry.biz (Gameindustry.biz sister website?) writing that piece on Apple Arcade "suffering" or what-have-you. Ironic part there being most of the problems they were mentioning, apply to Game Pass, yet apparently no one connected the dots in the article so the fanatics who stan for Game Pass obviously won't, either.

How convenient the gaming strategies of the two companies leading their respective segments of the gaming industry are coming under fire, and both just happen to also be direct competitors for Microsoft



Damn was this prophetic or what?

Underperforming was a poor choice of wording on my part. Usually when I post it’s in between changing shitty nappies and wiping boogers. I should have said meet Sonys expectations. While some games have been big on pc it’s not exactly hidden knowledge after the leaks that some haven’t sold as they should. Definitely wont be easy but I think it is definitely something they are looking at improving.

 

[mckmas8808]

They know why exclusives exist, they’re simply just doing Microsoft’s bidding. Make no mistake, all these people that are pushing this anti exclusive agenda are just either Microsoft fanboys or they’re actually paid/affiliated with Microsoft.
More so, this also reveals that Microsoft is indeed going multiplatform. They’re already getting their lackeys to convince their fans on why multi platform is a good strategy.

Tinfoil hat: By pushing the anti exclusive agenda and narrative, when Microsoft exists the hardware business, they’ll use that to sue Sony for monopoly, and try to get the courts to force Sony to allow other digital stores on PlayStation hardware, thereby getting Game Pass on PlayStation.

This actually sounds believable.

a so called "unisensei" on tweeter had an epic meltown agains Xbox Shills.

Where?

There was also the recent mobileindustry.biz (Gameindustry.biz sister website?) writing that piece on Apple Arcade "suffering" or what-have-you. Ironic part there being most of the problems they were mentioning, apply to Game Pass, yet apparently no one connected the dots in the article so the fanatics who stan for Game Pass obviously won't, either.

How convenient the gaming strategies of the two companies leading their respective segments of the gaming industry are coming under fire, and both just happen to also be direct competitors for Microsoft

Plus it's funny that both the $3 Trillion companies are struggling in the gaming space for similar reasons. Yet little Sony and Nintendo keep trucking on.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

Underperforming was a poor choice of wording on my part. Usually when I post it’s in between changing shitty nappies and wiping boogers. I should have said meet Sonys expectations. While some games have been big on pc it’s not exactly hidden knowledge after the leaks that some haven’t sold as they should. Definitely wont be easy but I think it is definitely something they are looking at improving.

Or more likely, as Helldivers 2 is showing, they will primarily release GaaS day 1 on PC and maybe a select few main titles after a certain period of time with minimum effort.

 

[jroc74]

There was also the recent mobileindustry.biz (Gameindustry.biz sister website?) writing that piece on Apple Arcade "suffering" or what-have-you. Ironic part there being most of the problems they were mentioning, apply to Game Pass, yet apparently no one connected the dots in the article so the fanatics who stan for Game Pass obviously won't, either.

How convenient the gaming strategies of the two companies leading their respective segments of the gaming industry are coming under fire, and both just happen to also be direct competitors for Microsoft

Exactly.

 

[IDappa]

Or more likely, as Helldivers 2 is showing, they will primarily release GaaS day 1 on PC and maybe a select few main titles after a certain period of time with minimum effort.

Honestly think gaas is 100 percent destined for day ones. I think they could also experiment with smaller SP titles?, maybe even Wolverine ?. Wolverine isn’t a small ip but being a marvel property could be an excuse to release in more places day dot.. Maybe keep original ip delayed off pc?. Idk there’s a few ways they could go about it.

 

[mayham2199]

Honestly think gaas is 100 percent destined for day ones. I think they could also experiment with smaller SP titles?, maybe even Wolverine ?. Wolverine isn’t a small ip but being a marvel property could be an excuse to release in more places day dot.. Maybe keep original ip delayed off pc?. Idk there’s a few ways they could go about it.

Hasn't Sony already said it GAAS is day 1?

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

You're really dying on that hill huh?

You've really gone out on a ledge with this one. You've misinterpreted the blogpost and there is nothing in the blogpost to suggest this is the case.

Edit: It makes great financial sense. You're assuming that PSVR2 is sold at a loss simply because it is expensive when in reality they are probably selling it at a serious premium. PSVR already received a price drop at this point in its life cycle. Not sure Sony would have built PSVR2 without something similar in mind.

I think by the time this support is enabled, the PSVR2 should likely receive a price cut and should STILL be making money.

It will also help them push GT7 VR and Horizon Call of the Mountain. And it will also get more developers supporting PSVR2 with PC games coming to PS5.

A streaming client makes the least amount of sense. That's a technical hurdle far larger than just allowing native support and that would make developers even LESS likely to develop PSVR2 games, when they could simply put the games on PC and avoid the larger royalties altogether.

I genuinely don't see how putting PSVR2 on PC via native support gets more PS5 ports of PC VR games. Did anything similar happen with PSVR? Because if so, fine. But I don't remember that having happened.

IMO if they make the headset natively compatible on PC, PC VR game makers are just going to focus more on ensuring their games are compatible with the headset, but won't bother much to port those games to PS5 if the PSVR2 install base on the console is relatively low. Now for traditional games with VR modes, it could be different, because VR is only part of the experience with those games.

Honestly think gaas is 100 percent destined for day ones. I think they could also experiment with smaller SP titles?, maybe even Wolverine ?. Wolverine isn’t a small ip but being a marvel property could be an excuse to release in more places day dot.. Maybe keep original ip delayed off pc?. Idk there’s a few ways they could go about it.

You mean the same Wolverine that PC people tried making a fully playable build out of from the Insomniac hack and thought they wouldn't be tracked when doing so but they were?
I dunno. The clause was that if the game didn't sell 6 million on PS consoles the first year, they'd be in a position where Disney/Marvel could push for Day 1 multiplatform release.

Honestly, I think Disney/Marvel need to get their head out of their asses and realize their stupidity with the MCU since the pandemic means they aren't the hot shit they used to be. The amount they're charging to licensing of their IP is ridiculous considering their string of mediocre MCU projects the past few years are diminishing demand not just for future MCU projects but related projects in other media, even.

Anyway, about smaller "experimental", let's say AA IP/games, being Day 1 on PC (and mobile)? I think that's possible for some of them, certainly. Particularly between console/mobile chiefly, though. It should also depend on the game in question because if say some are high-tier AA remakes of well-known and cherished classic games, those could probably be exclusive to the console for a year or 18 months, or maybe 2 years, then bring them to other platforms like mobile and PC.

They know why exclusives exist, they’re simply just doing Microsoft’s bidding. Make no mistake, all these people that are pushing this anti exclusive agenda are just either Microsoft fanboys or they’re actually paid/affiliated with Microsoft.
More so, this also reveals that Microsoft is indeed going multiplatform. They’re already getting their lackeys to convince their fans on why multi platform is a good strategy.

Tinfoil hat: By pushing the anti exclusive agenda and narrative, when Microsoft exists the hardware business, they’ll use that to sue Sony for monopoly, and try to get the courts to force Sony to allow other digital stores on PlayStation hardware, thereby getting Game Pass on PlayStation.

That is kind of a crazy idea, but it's the type of griminess I wouldn't put past Microsoft TBH. Which is why I have been refraining from using terms like "high performance consoles" and such that suddenly came into existence during the hoopla with the ABK deal, and would suggest others refrain from using those terms as well, even if they're otherwise well-meaning with them.

Or for that matter, get rid of the silly notion that Nintendo's in some completely separate market and doesn't compete with PlayStation: they do compete with Sony even if their means of doing so are more unorthodox (as in, very different from how Microsoft does). Same goes with Valve too for that matter, otherwise why are all of these once console-exclusive or console-primary gaming IP coming to Steam Day 1, but Valve still keeps their own published games 100% exclusive to Steam?

If you look at it from that POV, it becomes impossible for Microsoft to try some underhanded tactic like the one you're suggesting. But enough people have to see past some very deceptive ruses first.

 

[IDappa]

Hasn't Sony already said it GAAS is day 1?

I’m not sure tbh. Some folks on here seem to think otherwise. I may of missed it. Only thing I’ve seen is the interim ceo saying they need to do better with their multiplat output..

 

[IDappa]

I genuinely don't see how putting PSVR2 on PC via native support gets more PS5 ports of PC VR games. Did anything similar happen with PSVR? Because if so, fine. But I don't remember that having happened.

IMO if they make the headset natively compatible on PC, PC VR game makers are just going to focus more on ensuring their games are compatible with the headset, but won't bother much to port those games to PS5 if the PSVR2 install base on the console is relatively low. Now for traditional games with VR modes, it could be different, because VR is only part of the experience with those games.



You mean the same Wolverine that PC people tried making a fully playable build out of from the Insomniac hack and thought they wouldn't be tracked when doing so but they were?
I dunno. The clause was that if the game didn't sell 6 million on PS consoles the first year, they'd be in a position where Disney/Marvel could push for Day 1 multiplatform release.

Honestly, I think Disney/Marvel need to get their head out of their asses and realize their stupidity with the MCU since the pandemic means they aren't the hot shit they used to be. The amount they're charging to licensing of their IP is ridiculous considering their string of mediocre MCU projects the past few years are diminishing demand not just for future MCU projects but related projects in other media, even.

Anyway, about smaller "experimental", let's say AA IP/games, being Day 1 on PC (and mobile)? I think that's possible for some of them, certainly. Particularly between console/mobile chiefly, though. It should also depend on the game in question because if say some are high-tier AA remakes of well-known and cherished classic games, those could probably be exclusive to the console for a year or 18 months, or maybe 2 years, then bring them to other platforms like mobile and PC.



That is kind of a crazy idea, but it's the type of griminess I wouldn't put past Microsoft TBH. Which is why I have been refraining from using terms like "high performance consoles" and such that suddenly came into existence during the hoopla with the ABK deal, and would suggest others refrain from using those terms as well, even if they're otherwise well-meaning with them.

Or for that matter, get rid of the silly notion that Nintendo's in some completely separate market and doesn't compete with PlayStation: they do compete with Sony even if their means of doing so are more unorthodox (as in, very different from how Microsoft does). Same goes with Valve too for that matter, otherwise why are all of these once console-exclusive or console-primary gaming IP coming to Steam Day 1, but Valve still keeps their own published games 100% exclusive to Steam?

If you look at it from that POV, it becomes impossible for Microsoft to try some underhanded tactic like the one you're suggesting. But enough people have to see past some very deceptive ruses first.

Didn’t see much about the guys attempting to build out a Wolverine game off insomniac. Shows that there is demand for the game I suppose. Mcu has definitely lost a lot of its worth, in saying that I think there is still popular characters dead pool and Wolverine being a couple.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I genuinely don't see how putting PSVR2 on PC via native support gets more PS5 ports of PC VR games. Did anything similar happen with PSVR? Because if so, fine. But I don't remember that having happened.

IMO if they make the headset natively compatible on PC, PC VR game makers are just going to focus more on ensuring their games are compatible with the headset, but won't bother much to port those games to PS5 if the PSVR2 install base on the console is relatively low. Now for traditional games with VR modes, it could be different, because VR is only part of the experience with those games.

PSVR1 never got official PC support.

If devs patch their games to fully support PSVR2 on PC, it makes sense to take that work to deliver a PS5 port. If you're making a VR game and you're looking to take advantage of the PSVR2 features on PC, it makes sense to release that game on PS5 as well.

Not sure how this is a novel concept.

So you think devs are going to do all the work they have to to support a device, but not release on PS5 and forgo potential sales on short money? That makes no sense for VR economy, which is what Sony is trying to solve by adding PC support.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

I’m not sure tbh. Some folks on here seem to think otherwise. I may of missed it. Only thing I’ve seen is the interim ceo saying they need to do better with their multiplat output..

Nah, Shawn Layden already talked about how they were going to release GaaS day 1 on PC, but that Sony will never release singleplayer games day 1.
That was back in 2019/2020.

Then Jim Ryan and Hermen Hulst reiterated the same thing and now the interim CEO does as well.
That's already 4 top executives with the same message over the course of 4 years.

 

[Neofire]

I genuinely don't see how putting PSVR2 on PC via native support gets more PS5 ports of PC VR games. Did anything similar happen with PSVR? Because if so, fine. But I don't remember that having happened.

IMO if they make the headset natively compatible on PC, PC VR game makers are just going to focus more on ensuring their games are compatible with the headset, but won't bother much to port those games to PS5 if the PSVR2 install base on the console is relatively low. Now for traditional games with VR modes, it could be different, because VR is only part of the experience with those games.

This part and after you broke your points down so eloquently, people will still think that Sony adding PC support to play PCVR games on it helps out ps5 users and is going to magically open up all of these development opportunities.

Another indication of what Sony is doing is their recent studio closure of London Studios and the layoffs at Firesprite games. Both were at the helmet of their VR games. People shouldn't have to shell out more money to buy a capable PC when they already own a ps5 to enjoy their peripherals that was designed for the ps5 lol.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Didn’t see much about the guys attempting to build out a Wolverine game off insomniac. Shows that there is demand for the game I suppose. Mcu has definitely lost a lot of its worth, in saying that I think there is still popular characters dead pool and Wolverine being a couple.

Is it demand or fukery, though? And not all demand is good demand, maybe.

I do agree that of MCU characters, those like Wolverine and Deadpool still have a ton of selling power. In part though that's also because they aren't tied directly the the Marvel/Disney side of the MCU and are well-established characters for many decades by now.

PSVR1 never got official PC support.

If devs patch their games to fully support PSVR2 on PC, it makes sense to take that work to deliver a PS5 port. If you're making a VR game and you're looking to take advantage of the PSVR2 features on PC, it makes sense to release that game on PS5 as well.

Not sure how this is a novel concept.

So you think devs are going to do all the work they have to to support a device, but not release on PS5 and forgo potential sales on short money? That makes no sense for VR economy, which is what Sony is trying to solve by adding PC support.

Yes, they will likely choose to not make a native PS5 version of the game for that VR title. Why? Because if the audience of PSVR2 customers on PS5 is small enough that Sony feel they need to make the headset natively compatible on PC, what customer audience is there for PC VR game makers to spend the resources on a native PS5 version of the game that still requires the PSVR2 headset?

Especially if the costs for the port would outweigh whatever profits they get from even the PC version of the game, then they would just probably opt to not build a native PS5 port, but ensure their PC version can properly leverage the PSVR2 headset. Again I'm just speaking for purely VR games; traditional games with VR mode support as an option, would have a better chance of getting a native PS5 port if the headset were made compatible on PC.

But I also ask this: why would it be such a big deal for Sony to make a way for PS5 owners who have the headset to stream PC VR games, if they're going through the effort of also making the headset natively compatible on PC? Why can't they do both? Why not give console owners that option just in case a worst-case scenario pans out and a ton of PC VR games actually don't end up getting native PS5 ports?

That isn't much to ask. In fact, that should be the bare minimum being asked of them in this situation.

This part and after you broke your points down so eloquently, people will still think that Sony adding PC support to play PCVR games on it helps out ps5 users and is going to magically open up all of these development opportunities.

Another indication of what Sony is doing is their recent studio closure of London Studios and the layoffs at Firesprite games. Both were at the helmet of their VR games. People shouldn't have to shell out more money to buy a capable PC when they already own a ps5 to enjoy their peripherals that was designed for the ps5 lol.

Exactly, 100%. If Sony make PSVR2 PC-compatible, that's great. But what are doing to add more value to PS5 owners with the headset? People can't say "PS5 will get more ports of PC VR titles", because at that point it's not Sony doing that work, it's case-by-case 3P developers.

And the contradiction immediately forms, because if PSVR2 install base on PS5 is too small, where Sony feel they need to make it PC-compatible to justify the investment on their end, then what is the actual base of PS5 owners those PC VR devs would be selling their game to? Would the costs of the port justify that addressable market size? Probably not, in most cases.

Again I'm just saying this for VR-centric or VR-only titles; with traditional games that have VR modes optional, I think making PSVR2 PC-compatible does in fact open up the chances of those games getting native PS5 ports. But even so...you'd think those were the games that'd already be getting PS5 ports, no? Why would PSVR2 PC-compatibility suddenly help a traditional game on PC get a PS5 port the audience for traditional games on PS5 is already massive? If games like RE Village and GT7 can have optional VR modes exist, why would a traditional game on PC, that doesn't have a PS5 version yet, need the PSVR2 to be PC-compatible to justify that port when the VR demo on PS5 is incredibly small?

IMO that just doesn't check out.

 

[IDappa]

Nah, Shawn Layden already talked about how they were going to release GaaS day 1 on PC, but that Sony will never release singleplayer games day 1.
That was back in 2019/2020.

Then Jim Ryan and Hermen Hulst reiterated the same thing and now the interim CEO does as well.
That's already 4 top executives with the same message over the course of 4 years.

All we can do is wait I suppose. Should be an interesting couple of years in the gaming space.

Is it demand or fukery, though? And not all demand is good demand, maybe.

I do agree that of MCU characters, those like Wolverine and Deadpool still have a ton of selling power. In part though that's also because they aren't tied directly the the Marvel/Disney side of the MCU and are well-established characters for many decades by now.



Yes, they will likely choose to not make a native PS5 version of the game for that VR title. Why? Because if the audience of PSVR2 customers on PS5 is small enough that Sony feel they need to make the headset natively compatible on PC, what customer audience is there for PC VR game makers to spend the resources on a native PS5 version of the game that still requires the PSVR2 headset?

Especially if the costs for the port would outweigh whatever profits they get from even the PC version of the game, then they would just probably opt to not build a native PS5 port, but ensure their PC version can properly leverage the PSVR2 headset. Again I'm just speaking for purely VR games; traditional games with VR mode support as an option, would have a better chance of getting a native PS5 port if the headset were made compatible on PC.

But I also ask this: why would it be such a big deal for Sony to make a way for PS5 owners who have the headset to stream PC VR games, if they're going through the effort of also making the headset natively compatible on PC? Why can't they do both? Why not give console owners that option just in case a worst-case scenario pans out and a ton of PC VR games actually don't end up getting native PS5 ports?

That isn't much to ask. In fact, that should be the bare minimum being asked of them in this situation.



Exactly, 100%. If Sony make PSVR2 PC-compatible, that's great. But what are doing to add more value to PS5 owners with the headset? People can't say "PS5 will get more ports of PC VR titles", because at that point it's not Sony doing that work, it's case-by-case 3P developers.

And the contradiction immediately forms, because if PSVR2 install base on PS5 is too small, where Sony feel they need to make it PC-compatible to justify the investment on their end, then what is the actual base of PS5 owners those PC VR devs would be selling their game to? Would the costs of the port justify that addressable market size? Probably not, in most cases.

Again I'm just saying this for VR-centric or VR-only titles; with traditional games that have VR modes optional, I think making PSVR2 PC-compatible does in fact open up the chances of those games getting native PS5 ports. But even so...you'd think those were the games that'd already be getting PS5 ports, no? Why would PSVR2 PC-compatibility suddenly help a traditional game on PC get a PS5 port the audience for traditional games on PS5 is already massive? If games like RE Village and GT7 can have optional VR modes exist, why would a traditional game on PC, that doesn't have a PS5 version yet, need the PSVR2 to be PC-compatible to justify that port when the VR demo on PS5 is incredibly small?

IMO that just doesn't check out.

Probably a bit of both lol.

Well we will see how Disney wants to move forward with their characters when deadpool drops. Probably going to be sanatised PoS but the trailer has me hopeful, if I was a betting man I’d go with them destroying their last few popular characters but who knows. Hopefully insomniac knock it out of the park with a r rated gem.