Support NeoGAF

[nial]

We don't know for sure, all that's been said is that SSM is supervising the project. But even if it's limited to a set of consultants from SSM, it's still too much a waste of resource/time from them, and too much brand capital from PlayStation overall.

Supervising the project is exactly what I meant with that role being a tier above their old production work. You already know that they're not the core developers on it, and I don't think you should worry about how PlayStation spends its resources. It was already weird how people felt towards the Bungie acquisition, but some AA God of War game is seriously something to lose sleep for?

So the FBM condition was set by Shawn Layden in the PS4 gen. I'm not sure about the specific year. Earliest would be 2014, latest would be 2018. But if not the explicit policy, very similar tenets had been running through the organization as soon as the PS4 gen started.

'First, best, and must': PlayStation boss Shawn Layden shares the secret recipe behind Sony’s global gaming empire

"At its heart, game production is a creative activity. And as a creative activity, it really comes down to the people behind the project."

www.businessinsider.com

As an aside, I like this quote. Sony seems to have forgotten:

Since we only code to one platform, we really want to be the leader in showing everything that platform can deliver. We don't have to make choices to create technologies which will run across many different target technologies. We just lean into the PlayStation thing solely. And it allows us to focus our attentions there.

Let's see, how would you apply the philosophy to the following products?

• Knack
• Freedom Wars
• Oreshika: Tainted Bloodlines
• Driveclub
• The Order: 1886
• Days Gone
• Concrete Genie
• Monkey King: Hero is Back
• Predator: Hunting Grounds

In what way were all these first, best or must?

Edit: Thinking on it some more nial
, Killzone is a pretty interesting case. It came around at the point when Call of Duty was perhaps the prime driver of the 7th game industry boom. The "must" in that was felt by a lot of studios/publishers. "We must have a FPS franchise that acts as a direct competitor to CoD, or at least rides the wave."

It's the same reason so many smaller studios try to copy-paste the Soulsborne formula. Frankly, you can argue it's the whole reason Sony pursued the live service agenda. "We must have a recurring revenue game".

I give them more grace for making this "we must jump on the supposed bandwagon" mistake in the mid-late 2000s than I do now; because that was a mistake, and they should've learned the lesson.

Killzone came out before the likes of COD4, and its origins are certainly unexplained. Keep in mind that this was in pre-Worldwide Studios world, which didn't exist before July 2005. The most common answer is that Sony was looking to have a Halo competitor, but don't forget that Killzone is a SCEE project, in a time where the regional branches would, for the most part, make products for their domestic market first and foremost. Why would SCEE even look at Halo, considering that the original Xbox underperformed in Europe?
Even so, if that's what you feel the 'must' is, can't we make this exact same argument over Sony looking at one of the most popular genres on the AA/indie spectrum, and feeling that they have the chance to offer a quality product along those same lines?

Shuhei was made head of PS Studios in '08 and greenlit the Demon's Souls, Puppeteers etc probably as the "Firsts"/quirky titles. He has literally explained that Sony wasn't primarily trying to maximize sales with every game, but to make PS holistically appealing as a platform. Ultimately, that's what FBM is about. Layden just made it explicit.

I mean, I don't know if you mean the Demon's Souls remake, as Shu sure as fuck didn't greenlit the original game. It's not like Puppeteer was the first of its kind, either, it's not even as quirky as stuff like Kuma Uta or Koufuku Sousakan, nor it is as genuine as something like the original Ape Escape.

The Must/Best games for PS first party imo are the cutting edge AAA action-adventure games of many kinds the brand is identified for. That's what they're best at and the rest is largely satisfied by 3rd party.

I mean, considering that Sony's first Must/Best was (outside of Arc the Lad) Gran Turismo, I question this idea as well. I don't know why 2D God of War couldn't have a chance of making the platform holistically more appealing when Puppeteer had it, but I disagree with your general views over what Sony should be.

All of those big guns we're cross gen though, which was a very big long term mistake. Other than that, each of those big guns were, frankly, underwhelming on a creative level.

Latter point is subjective, former point; how do we define the long-term mistake here? For all we know, all those games sold best on PS5 and drove hardware adoption.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Is this the 2D one or the next in the 3D series?

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Is this the 2D one or the next in the 3D series?

If this whole rumour is true, it'd be their 2.5D metroidvania game.

 

[ProtoByte]

Supervising the project is exactly what I meant with that role being a tier above their old production work. You already know that they're not the core developers on it, and I don't think you should worry about how PlayStation spends its resources. It was already weird how people felt towards the Bungie acquisition, but some AA God of War game is seriously something to lose sleep for?

I'm not going to lose sleep, but I do not agree with it. It's funny you refer to Bungie to make the argument that "worrying about PS resource use is weird". They spent over 3 billion dollars on an acquisition that has literally achieved ZERO of their own objectives, which weren't in the interest of PS players anyway. Bungie's on games are either going out with a whimper (Destiny) or creating massive money and PR problems for PlayStation (Marathon). The live service initiative Bungie was supposed to help lock in for some kind of success has been a catastrophic and total failure. Ryan and Hulst's agenda imploded, and Bungie did nothing to stop it.

That's 3.2 billion gone and a combined ~20-22+ years of first party studio time and resource just wiped out. There are at least 2 PS Studios that will skip the generation outright; the only ones who've seemingly avoided that nonsense are SSM and Sucker Punch.

Let's see, how would you apply the philosophy to the following products?

• Knack
• Freedom Wars
• Oreshika: Tainted Bloodlines
• Driveclub
• The Order: 1886
• Days Gone
• Concrete Genie
• Monkey King: Hero is Back
• Predator: Hunting Grounds

In what way were all these first, best or must?

If they're not XDEV projects, almost all of these were either greenlit or released prior to 2014, the earliest point in the window I gave you. I will repeat, I believe elements of the policy were implicitly running through Yoshida's greenlight decision making prior to then.

The "First" condition is the least literal, because even at that point there were barely any industry "firsts" left in the purest sense.

Knack - At the time there was a lot of talk about how Knack was using the PS4's tech in "innovative" ways, visually and in gameplay. I also imagine there was some Must in there. At the time, Insomniac was still trying their hand at being a freelancer and left the PS pen. Ratchet wasn't a guarantee so "we must at least try to launch a new mascot platformer".

Driveclub - Best racing game visuals on our new console.

Order 1886 - Best visuals in an action adventure game on our new console.

Concrete Genie - First Graffiti Artist type game? Quirky and "original" at least.

Killzone came out before the likes of COD4, and its origins are certainly unexplained. Keep in mind that this was in pre-Worldwide Studios world, which didn't exist before July 2005. The most common answer is that Sony was looking to have a Halo competitor,

Yes you're right. So the point stands though I was incorrect with the timeline.

but don't forget that Killzone is a SCEE project, in a time where the regional branches would, for the most part, make products for their domestic market first and foremost. Why would SCEE even look at Halo, considering that the original Xbox underperformed in Europe?
Even so, if that's what you feel the 'must' is, can't we make this exact same argument over Sony looking at one of the most popular genres on the AA/indie spectrum, and feeling that they have the chance to offer a quality product along those same lines?

Absolutely you can apply the Must that way.

None of that is achieved with a 3rd rate attempt at a GoW metroidvania. Again, seriously, go fund a new Mega Man X or something instead.

I mean, I don't know if you mean the Demon's Souls remake, as Shu sure as fuck didn't greenlit the original game.

Sony literally owns the IP of Demon's Souls. Game wouldn't have happened if Shuhei's regime didn't back it.

It's not like Puppeteer was the first of its kind, either, it's not even as quirky as stuff like Kuma Uta or Koufuku Sousakan, nor it is as genuine as something like the original Ape Escape.

See above about the interpretation of "First".

Latter point is subjective, former point; how do we define the long-term mistake here? For all we know, all those games sold best on PS5 and drove hardware adoption.

Latter point is not subjective, it's an observation about how people now perceive those games. I do not have the time, tools or inclination to do that scientifically, and I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.

Whether or not it's a long term mistake will depend on whether or not the PS5 winds up at a lower units sold mark than PS4 when all is said and done, and how much the extended cross gen period directly and indirectly contributed to that. Again, difficult to do scientifically, but common sense and observation to the reaction at the time when Sony pulled the rug out after pretending that Miles Morales and Forbidden West were next gen only with the "we believe in generation rhetoric, and the fact that there are still so many people active on the previous gen, indicates that cross gen periods harm the new consoles, not help them.

 

[Danny22]

Huge God Of War fan since the beginning (loved them all except Ragnarok) and this does not sound appealing, at all. I'd rather wait a few more years and get a real installment of the series back in the Greek mythology with old Kratos.

Whats wrong with Ragnarok?

 

[Metnut]

The game was originally going to have only test but they decided to go voice acting for the whole thing, hence the delay.

 

[bitbydeath]

The greek games were always 2.5D right?
Those games had fixed cameras and while it could move, you couldn't control it, everything you saw was limited to what the devs intended you to see and nothing more.

I get you had more freedom than say Ghouls and Ghosts but it wasn't full 3D like the norse entries.

Maybe it's more 2.3/4D.

 

[Lokaum D+]

Sony really need a shake, clean the house and start fresh, what a disgraceful generation.

 

[Giallo Corsa]

Whats wrong with Ragnarok?

Everything man

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

Fuck Hermen.

 

[nial]

I'm not going to lose sleep, but I do not agree with it. It's funny you refer to Bungie to make the argument that "worrying about PS resource use is weird". They spent over 3 billion dollars on an acquisition that has literally achieved ZERO of their own objectives, which weren't in the interest of PS players anyway. Bungie's on games are either going out with a whimper (Destiny) or creating massive money and PR problems for PlayStation (Marathon). The live service initiative Bungie was supposed to help lock in for some kind of success has been a catastrophic and total failure. Ryan and Hulst's agenda imploded, and Bungie did nothing to stop it.

That's 3.2 billion gone and a combined ~20-22+ years of first party studio time and resource just wiped out. There are at least 2 PS Studios that will skip the generation outright; the only ones who've seemingly avoided that nonsense are SSM and Sucker Punch.

No no, Bungie is the perfect example, it was very arguably a misguided use of money, but it's still just the result of additional imvestment from the parent company to back up a M&A move. Sony wasn't going to have those 3.2B for anything else, and less so for a branch that is perfectly well funded like PSS. Not to mention that SIE isn't obviously just PSS, I can easily say that that money would have made the PS6P even better.
And which other studio is skipping the gen outright outside of Bend Studio (which are seriously mismanaged like hell, layoffs are obviously bad and all that, but I wish I never had to hear about them again).

If they're not XDEV projects, almost all of these were either greenlit or released prior to 2014, the earliest point in the window I gave you. I will repeat, I believe elements of the policy were implicitly running through Yoshida's greenlight decision making prior to then.

The "First" condition is the least literal, because even at that point there were barely any industry "firsts" left in the purest sense.

Knack - At the time there was a lot of talk about how Knack was using the PS4's tech in "innovative" ways, visually and in gameplay. I also imagine there was some Must in there. At the time, Insomniac was still trying their hand at being a freelancer and left the PS pen. Ratchet wasn't a guarantee so "we must at least try to launch a new mascot platformer".

Driveclub - Best racing game visuals on our new console.

Order 1886 - Best visuals in an action adventure game on our new console.

Concrete Genie - First Graffiti Artist type game? Quirky and "original" at least.

Knack and Concrete Genie I will give you, but is being top tier at visuals enough to classify as 'Best' (I assume)? You definitely talk about gameplay and game design, so I know you're not purely a graphics whore, which makes the argument weirder. Considering that both games failed to make any impact in most other departments, I question Sony's ability to deliver 'First, Must, Best' in a consistent manner last gen. And again, what about the likes of Monkey King or Days Gone?

Yes you're right. So the point stands though I was incorrect with the timeline.

The timeline is inherent to the point, so IDK.

Absolutely you can apply the Must that way.

None of that is achieved with a 3rd rate attempt at a GoW metroidvania. Again, seriously, go fund a new Mega Man X or something instead.

This is a bad faith argument when you have seen NOTHING about the game.

Sony literally owns the IP of Demon's Souls. Game wouldn't have happened if Shuhei's regime didn't back it.

Shuhei Yoshida becomes head of SCE WWS in May 2008.
Demon's Souls launches in February 2009.
Nothing of that matches up, we know DS started development in 2006 under Phil Harrison's regime (who arguably provided more sophistication to the ecosystem than Shu).

See above about the interpretation of "First".

Puppeteer was still a third-rate 2D platformer that didn't exactly offer anything to the platform. I still don't see it.
Demon's Souls is a great example, but it was not backed up by the regime you're actually talking about.

Latter point is not subjective, it's an observation about how people now perceive those games. I do not have the time, tools or inclination to do that scientifically, and I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.

How do you apply this observation, though? By looking at these niche forums? From actual sales legs or even review ratings, it's cloaer to the complete opposite.

Whether or not it's a long term mistake will depend on whether or not the PS5 winds up at a lower units sold mark than PS4 when all is said and done, and how much the extended cross gen period directly and indirectly contributed to that. Again, difficult to do scientifically, but common sense and observation to the reaction at the time when Sony pulled the rug out after pretending that Miles Morales and Forbidden West were next gen only with the "we believe in generation rhetoric, and the fact that there are still so many people active on the previous gen, indicates that cross gen periods harm the new consoles, not help them.

There were always going to be these many users on PS4 as long as the PS5 was selling on a similar pace.
It's close to literally impossible to have the vast majority of the PS4 userbase to migrate by this point, and the argument people make only makes sense if the PS5 suddenly stopped selling by now. As long as we aim for ~110M consoles every 7 years, it will also take 7 years to completely reduce the previous console's userbase.

 

[Bond007]

Cant delay wasnt hasnt been announced. lol
I will play it whenever it comes to fruition.