I felt like we just went through this with NFTs. Consumers are screaming at these companies that we don't want this but yet they push forward with giant grins...
Sony is also looking at implementing NFTs into their video games according to patents they filed. Wouldn't be surprised if they implemented NFTs into at least one of these live service games at some point, though under a different name.
@@jimmythegamer2231 just because they file patents does not mean they plan to use them, it often is just so other people can't use them, or so they have to pay them to use them
@@jimmythegamer2231 as I said, them making a patent doesn't mean they are considering it either. It just means their lawyer had an idea that they wanted to patent
This live-service push, in conjuction with them shutting down some of my favorite studios like Japan Studio is really making me question why I even own a PS5. If this is the direction Sony is heading in, I don't see myself sticking around for the PS6.
For me, I probably have enough PS4 games and even a few PS3 games (like Prototype) in my backlog to weather this misguided direction Sony is taking. It's also a great idea to have another system to run to. Rescue me, TOTK!
I Hope they fail horribly and reconsider and make a great comeback one day. The PS5 is an amazing console that’s never used to it’s full potential and it makes me so sad
@@swaeshow WHat are you going to stop gaming? I don't think Sony single player games are going anywhere and while they are good they take so long to make. Do you only play the exclusives or?
Sony push into esports kind of feel flat. Kind of unbelievable they would push this hard when so many live service games seem to crash almost instantly
People just want to play a game. Complete it and move on to the next game. Maybe dabble in some online from time to time. Unless you're still at school nobody has the time to put in hundreds and hundreds of hours into 8-10 different live services.
Single player games aren’t as profitable. The only reason they make games like god of war is to get you in their ecosystem for the live service games that make the real money.
I agree in a way, but we still have great studios like sucker punch, insomniac, square Enix. We're lucky, not every game is for us but I do miss more of the anime titles that were good.
Sony have to adapt though. They mostly focus on making one type of game, they need to diversify their investments. Im not fan of live service games, unless it's older mmorpg's with a monthly subscription they could bring out something decent.
Just look at all Hermen Hulst interviews for the past 3 years, They aren't stopping making SP games, they are just adding MP games on the top, and those new studios (Haven, Firewalk, Bungie) for MP console and PC, + Lasengle and Savage Studio for mobile, were bought for that task without dragging the current and old studios into the live service/mobile madness. They are expanding, not converting. The only problem with Sony though is the communication.. we have no idea what their next projects looks like yet, except Insomniac and 3rd party remakes and deals..
Spawn wave has always said. For a company like Sony, all it needs is 1 success out of 10 attempts for them to make lots of money for this to be all worth it
@@Matanumi Then they're screwed because Sony is then left with 5-6 first-party studios that are dedicated exclusively to making live service games. They wouldn't be good at making singleplayer titles.
Sure if in the console space you make a Fortnite, Minecraft, Overwatch, Warzone or PUBG (even then, all those games are largely PC/mobile-based audiences), but everything else… No. Also if Sony had 10 games developed making other kind of games, the odds are they all make money and overall it is more profitable.
@@jimmythegamer2231 Everyone at one point wasn't good at something. Don't be ignorant in saying that a developer that specializes in live service games wouldn't be able to create a great single player game in the future.
@@PSYCHOV3N0M I'm not saying there's no way they'll ever be successful at making a singleplayer game, but it will be very difficult for a studio trained to make live service games to pivot into a different genre entirely. Most singleplayer studios are having major issues developing live service games - such as Arcane, Naughty Dog, Rocksteady, etc. - so the opposite would probably apply as well.
I don't like how they're pushing for live services more. It just makes them look greedy and money-driven instead of passionate about making high quality games from our beloved franchises. I'm sure at least a handful of these live services focused games might yield the profit numbers they're looking for. But gamers are generally not going to like this trend.
I understand why they are doing it. They already have their games in a good place so now they want to focus on their live service end. Xbox has a good live service up and running so now they are going to get their games in a good place.
thats because they are "greedy and money driven" if they thought they could get away with recycling the same game over and over like call of duty they absolutely would.
The sad part is that this live service push probably isn't gonna stop anytime soon. Live service games have proven that, when successful, they can be some of the most successful games for a company in years or ever. Epic Games might've been a known presence before Fortnite with Unreal Engine and Unreal Tournament, but Fortnite is what made them truly big. It's their most successful IP by a landslide. Another example is Apex Legends which is EA's premier shooter and one of the big three battle royales. When a live service is successful, it becomes a developer's/publisher's crowning jewel simply due to the profit it makes. You might think about how for every successful live service there are 5 failures, but the issue with that is that a majority of those failures are from smaller publishers or even indies sometimes. Knockout City was an EA published indie that eventually went self-published, Spellbreak and Rumbleverse were indies with Epic Games endorsement, and there are tons of other examples on top of this, and most of them result in the closure of a studio, heck out of those examples only Knockout City's developer Velan Studios didn't close and that could very well be because they made Mario Kart Live Home Circuit which gave them good insurance. Even the triple A's aren't safe, Hyper Scape was Ubisoft's attempt and it didn't live long at all. But the issue is that we're talking Sony here, one of the biggest names in gaming, one of the biggest console manufacturers of all time, and as a result, they have a LOT of money to throw at the wall to try and get that single successful live service. Until they get that, they could theoretically go with this as long as they like, or as long as it takes to convince them that they'll never get a successful live service. Their single player games are what they're known for in the core gaming world, but casual people who play stuff like FIFA or CoD likely don't know or care about something like Horizon too much. If they can get a single live service that successfully attracts the casual crowd, it'll easily pay for all of the potential failures they had before. So until they either fail so much that they give up or they succeed, I doubt this'll stop soon. And it sucks.
@@Matanumi That's the point. Mass consumers won't stop because they don't care. They don't care about spending millions of dollars on mtx and live service games unfortunately.
@@Matanumi Sadly it won't matter since they only need a small number of whales to make most of their money. So they will begin making games that cater to the whales rather than us.
Doesn't matter. F2P games is a successful monetary model that makes TONS of money for mobile games publishers, but console and PC gamers mostly have rejected it. NFTs and crypto gaming would have made insane amounts of money for corporate publishers and their greedy useless rich shareholder investers....but the majority of console and pc gamers have rejected it. Loot boxes made unimaginable amounts of money for EA and Activision, but eventually console and PC gamers fought back and rejected it. Games as a service is the next most harmful and biggest push corporations are trying to get through, I have already rejected Games as a service/streaming/cloud/subscriptions and I know the majority of gamers will reject it. Also money talks, if all the major publishers go all out with Games as a service, other companies would be more than happy to cater to gamers who don't want any of that $#!t.
The problem with Sony's GAAS push is they will be putting out so many GAAS games in the next couple years (12 games) that they will easily overlap, and in turn, likely eat each another's possible user base. People that tend to play GAAS only focus on one or two games not 6+. So, games may never reach potential even if one could have as its potential base us being taken away from a similar Sony GASS game . And you can only keep so many balls in the air trying to juggle all while trying to gain traction. Sony will be lucky if they even get one half-way successful game. The odds are it will be a game from another company no one so coming that is the next big thing anyways. You know organic. Plus, unlike normal games, after release your teams moves to work on other projects. The GAAS team is constantly kept to keep content flowing. That means in most cases that the developer is locked down and focused on that game only. And GAAS games that are very successful can die quite quickly, PUBG was king than it wasn't (1.5 million daily users on steam to now 120k). Sony could get PUBG success, celebrate, put all their eggs in that basket as with great numbres.. Then (out of the blue) comes a Fortnite and everybody moves on in a matter of months. Like PUBG that would most of those gamers. Plus, with 12 games that Sony has plans to release (possibly more in planning stages) I don't see Sony sticking around too long supporting any GAAS game if they have very little traction. A year and if no traction it is gone. But the problem is several very popular GAAS games took years to gain traction. That also breeds distrust among users. Sort of like how Google is now not trusted to support its products and shut them down unless they are immediately successful may taint how users view Sony's GAAS offerings after a while.
I hate live service games, they are a cancer in the industry, made purely to be exploitative in nature and extract as much money out of the player as possible.
They are essentially doing the opposite of Xbox. They already have there games in a solid place so now they are going to get there live service up to snuff. And since Xbox has their live service up and running pretty well now they are going to focus on making good games for now.
@@jimmythegamer2231 this is a weird generation on every end -Microsoft is recovering and rebuilding slowly to form a new Xbox identity that has incredible potential -Sony has a half dozen amazing established PlayStation studios, a few rising studios but lost all their Japanese talent and has questionable leadership decisions for their future -Nintendo keeps improving its dozen established 1st party studios and most its established IP’s while making stupid money
Live service is gonna destroy Sony and is so dumb all they’re doing is following trends and their first live service the last of us multiplayer might just get canceled what a great way to start it’s almost like most gamers don’t like this garbage 🗑️
Most gamers don’t have to like it. Only enough that spend have to like it. The people that don’t like it are irrelevant as long as they hit the desired revenue.
If only people weren't playing as much Fortnite, Apex Legends, Warzone, Genshin Impact, or Overwatch 2 and spending loads of money while doing so and so on, maybe, just maybe Sony (or whatever other publisher) wouldn't consider making their own stuff to expand by buying new studios for that specific task without asking all their old studios to go that path...🥴 Expanding =/= Converting
This push for live service games by Sony is purely motivated by profit. They're taking the media art form of game development and transforming it into a cookie cutter production where their studios just pump out one live service game after another in hopes of catching lightning in a bottle. It's honestly pretty gross to see as an older gamer.
I'd say there all going to stumble cause sonys audience demands premium experiences and is willing to pay for it. These trash service games will not go over well
They won't if they're free to play and have an audience because the biggest spenders combined usually ends up giving them more money than it takes to upkeep servers and other perpetual resources. The biggest recent flops was down to either it being pre-paid, or poorly marketed. Pre-paid on console puts up two barriers at once, the game's upfront fee and the online subscription service so that doesn't maximise potential players at all. They're high-risk but from their point of view can also be high return if they get people invested.
Well, they're hoping that at least a few turn out to be profitable which will cover the cost of the others plus more. If they all turn out to be failures then they will have to eat the losses, or if they're lucky at least manage to break even.
It appears to be a blessing that I missed the PS4 Gen because now I have a massive back catalog to play through, especially since the future seems to be looking more unappealing.
A 60% investment sound to me way too risky if i may say. I mean, taking into account most people here have an objection to make about live service games.
The only way Live service can be done right is being a Free game. I just see Sony being Greedy and thinking it's ok to pull an Anthem and charging for the game and still expect for you to spend tons of money on content. I think they will be humbled real quick. There's only so much room for live service until it gets watered down. Just look at tv live services. Everybody wanted in on the Netflix action and they all mostly bleeding.
@exoo if you think Sony can make a successful MMORPG out of an established franchise that grosses over 10 billion lifetime like was done with Warcraft or Final Fantasy you are living in a fantasy land. None of Sony’s IP’s are big enough to net anywhere near that.
Are sony and microsoft not seeing what Nintendo is doing? Xenoblade? Zelda? Did sony not see how well god of war did? Don’t these guys realize we just want good games, no microtransactions, and the online component should be fun-first? They stand to make far more money by churning out constant high quality games instead of live service games. Dont they know gamers stick to 1, maybe 2, live service games at a time? I don’t know man. This constant thirst for money and growth makes sense but it’ll be the gamers that won’t keep up. Just make some games, guys. It really is all we want. We’ll buy the consoles, just make some games.
Games like COD and Destiny 2 make more money than Zelda, and apart from that, they are games that continue forever and provide constant income. PlayStation and Nintendo have a totally different business model and with all those gold games Nintendo release they are still far behind Sony in terms of revenue.
@@reahslademhA No, I'm talking only about SIE (PlayStation) and not Sony as a whole. PS is the number one in terms of revenue and market share. This is just a fact.
I’ve been gaming for over 40 years. I can only speak for myself, but to me.. the future of gaming is in single player immersive experiences. Not games where the immersion is destroyed by some troll named DeezNutz69. Sony is going to lose money chasing this unicorn & rightfully so. They’re ignoring their player base!
It doesn't help with optics as they also had leaned towards NFT, so it definitely spooks me to make me wonder if whether NFTs will be incorporated with these live services.
I will put both my balls on the line in saying this. You cry about NFT’s, BUT YOU WILL be utilizing NFT/crypto tech whether you know it or not sometime in your life. People like you who knows nothing about the innovation behind crypto, I guarantee you, you will be utilizing crypto whether you like it or not. You won’t have a choice. If you move money overseas, buy real estate or a car as an example, and you sign a digital contract- right then and there BOOM your signature is minted as an NFT while that particular property is tokenized. Anything that is of value can and will be tokenized on the blockchain. Within real estate as an example, Via an NFT code, gone are the days of sifting through paperwork or emails and buyers can easily view information of former owners, tax rates and any other legality issues that may arise.
And all this is done via a simple NFT code. As a Landlord (still purchasing real estate) and business owner, I can appreciate and see how much more streamlined real areas of life can benefit from blockchain technology. So, I would argue that NFT’s in video games are preparing you for real world implementation of the technology. Because let me tell you now, real estate and other sectors within housing are already utilizing crypto tech like XRP to tokenize land. This is only the beginning.
Lmao, that’s what people said about the internet when the US government tried to stop it. They resisted but the dam wall broke and they were forced to innovate or get left behind. Live service clearly makes money. As an equities investor in these companies, they aren’t dumb. They know where the money is!
Just go Nintendo :). They have no live service games, apart from maybe something like Pokémon which feels like a live service game with all the yearly releases.
@@THATCANADIANDUDE682 Most of those old gen games aren't that great anymore IMO (save for PS3/360 era games, which still hold up). A lot of those PS1 and PS2 games have aged like milk, especially the ones attempting to be realistic. GTA 3 and San Andreas for instance are not that great anymore. I was bored to death playing them due to how little interactivity there is compared to latter titles in the series. I'd much rather play a more modern game like GTA 4, GTA 5 or RDR2. I feel like a lot of old-school gamers are clouded by nostalgia and conveniently ignore literally any good modern game to fit their narratives. Oh and the original Resident Evil 2 on PS1 is also pretty mediocre nowadays. Back then it was amazing, but nowadays it would be rated as a 6/10 game at best. I imagine I'll get a lot of hate for this comment because of the unpopular opinion I have.
@@Markde9876 Splatoon, Mario Kart 8, Super Smash Bros Ultimate, Kirby Fighters, Pokemon Cafe Mix, etc are all live service games from Nintendo. I don't know what you're talking about lol.
The chart showing what’s on each side of the fence sums up my disappointment. Instead of guerrilla and naughty dog working on something I will probably be interested in, they are working on something I probably won’t be interested in. And that’s a big concern when that’s two of Sony’s top talent studios.
“It’s certainly the tightrope being walked by Sony, and I’m hoping they don’t fall off midway through…” I do hope that they fall off. Sony shifting their focus to Live-Service games is an artistically flaccid and ethically bankrupt decision.
I won’t. I play a game, if I like it, I’ll finish it and maybe 100%. Done and move on to next game. Unless if it’s DLC or the game has replay value I don’t want to keep playing the same game over and over again when I can play other titles
Try to say that to Sony's investors with all the data they get from people spending in BattlePass, DLCs and skins among the most played games on their own plaform with 3rd party like, Fortnite, Warzone, Genshin Impact, PUBG, Overwatch 2, FF14, Apex Legends and so on. Most of the money PS make each quarter and year is from those 3rd party GAAS games, basically funding those SP games we love so much as the cost to make them just continue to grow.. They expand and bought studio for that specific task without asking every other of their older studios to follow that path, they are adding MP without substracting the SP part.
@@SergentXII If you look at that investment graph of Sony’s you’ll see live service budget increasing massively over the next two years while single player stays level with 2018-19 spend. Given inflation running so high, the *actual* investment decreases as a percentage of development resource. Look how many studios had to give up making IP at AB so they can keep on top of annual COD development for example. If Sony are making 12 LS games, that’s 12 teams tied up for the next few years on content drip and if as you say it’s where Sony makes all its money, they’re obviously going to prop this up at the expense of low profit SP games. All because they shut all their AA studios who knew how to make great games that *didnt* cost £250m in pursuit of Nintendo-like IP sales. Oops.
The one that had us buy a platform for Exclusives and then latter on they made that platform irrelevant because they released those Exclusives on PC? NO! i want what i buy to remain relevant
@@Force-Multiplier I just want them to focus on narrative games. I don’t mind them making 1-3 online games to try to catch a good one but I think it’s over kill at this moment. I don’t really care about games going to PC personally, as long as their great games, let PC gamers experience them and give the devs more sales to green light future projects. IMO
@@rrice3142 then you get a situation where you're trapped in an inferior system to get "exclusives" that aren't really exclusives when you could be playing on a better system from the start (aka PC) as for the narrative part ... you haven't payed much attention to PS3 games from what im getting because many PS3 exclusives where already heavy on their narrative heck it all started there with The Last of Us
I hope every one of their live service games fail to be honest. Because I think the games are just genuinely, painfully, mediocre. Even Haven's game that we haven't even seen yet looks like a flop just waiting to happen. And I mean it just seems like a bad idea for a console developer to make that many live service games. They're exclusive to your platform so they're all competing again each other in a way single player games just do not. Spend this money to make cool, creative, AA games to supplement your big AAA games instead of this bullshit.
How does a multimillion dollar company not know that most gamers don't like live-service games? On top of that, they're coming out with so many when the main issue with live-service games besides the monetization is the time - each one takes time, which with so many planned to release by PlayStation, it's going to be hard to divide time into. Most will flop watch.
how things will end up is pretty simple: there's a point where it tips, there's a point where it breaks, there's a point where it bends, and a point we just can't take, anymore.
As a gamer, and a ps5 owner, I give zero shits about Sonys direction right now. I need to see more single player stuff. I'll be heavily distracted by Starfield regardless of its quality versus Skyrim or Fallout,and maybe still Zelda, so they have to work hard to keep my attention. And I really want to see more for my PSVR2 Spiderman 2 looks great but I didn't finish the first or miles morales.
Haven is unknown? They're mostly a bunch of ex-Ubisoft employees that decided to go off on their own and make Ubisoft games in DNA only. So that's how Haven's game will play, run and feel when you start that game. The trailer gave you hints 😒
This is one of the major reasons I haven't felt a need to get a ps5. I've noticed the changes and they've moved so far away from what made them successful. I'm sticking to PC and Nintendo. I see no reason to get a ps5 and I can play Xbox games on my pc.
@@ghost-type Oh okay lol. Then I don't see any reason to own a Nintendo Switch when the Steam Deck is better in every way except maybe battery life. That being said, you probably will need to get a Switch 2 as you won't be able to emulate Switch 2 games for at least several years depending on how powerful (or how weak) the console is.
@@jimmythegamer2231 Yeah, I've had a Switch for a while now so once I get got my Steam Deck, I didn't really put much time into it, but I'll definitely be getting the Switch 2 or whatever they call it.
"Live service" types have their place (it started with MMORPGs), the problem, like with ANY type of game, is when the industry as a whole, ALL jump on that bandwagon and saturate the HELL out of the market with that ONE type of game that drives players to get really sick of it. It happened with Boomer Shooters, MMORPG's, and Mil-Sim FPS's (And im sure many more im forgetting). Even now im seeing alot of live service fatigue and many of them are failing right out of the gate. Not sure why Sony thinks this is a good idea to dump that much of their focus and investment into it. Its like they are not reading the social market.
I wish the gaming industry could get back to the 00's era vibe. When game magazine's had demo discs. They'd dive into game development stuff. I just miss seeing the behind the scenes stuff. The process of putting ideas together & finding out what works best through using a play testing process. I think companies need to show glimpses of gameplay more and stop with all this "radio silence route that game companies take now.. its awful." Their current approach is definitely creating this sorta reverse psychology effect because they just aren't approaching how to handle the gaming world "in these long spaces between game's." While projects are being worked on sorta thing. The entire gaming industry needs to find better ways to approach & do these things. It will benefit gaming as a whole. The companies & the customers will be in a better place. We gotta improve things. If they want to keep making $$$ they gotta improve things.
As for budgets, don’t you think if GOW Ragnarok or Horizon Forbidden West were half the size it would have actually been ok, or even better? I’ve finished both games but the size and bloat puts me off ever wanting to play them ever again. However a game like GOW 2018 being much smaller I could see myself playing again.
Of all the teams they should have working on live service; why is naughty dog? They have fewer employees than a lot of their other studios. Also instead of pushing for live service MULTIPLAYER titles that are free and easy to access. Why can’t they just develop multiplayer into their current single player games. This ultimately can allow you to still create add-ons for these games. The add-ons can expand single player and multiplayer.
Naughty Dog wanted Factions as it's own thing. They made the call, not Sony this time. If it had stayed with Last of Us Part 2 we'd have it by now and be done with it. Go be mad at Naughty Dog for their decision.
Naughty dog is my favorite developer. I’m not mad by any means either. I just know that once they get full swing all my hope for a jak sequel, uncharted sequel, and potentially the last of us part 3 will be low. Dev time already takes forever. If they could really add to the lore of the main storyline with factions. They would heavily benefit. I would wait until part 3 to drop factions
The only one live service that managed to really be successful was destiny and GTA online. The others, while they still have a good player base never really managed to become a huge phenomenon. Problem is that even though there is a huge multiplayer audience for games I really think that the market is pretty saturated and having more than a dozen titles in this direction will literally kill the income stream for sony down the line. The thing is that I do not really see any live service game working with bullet sponges and without microtransactions. I did not like destiny. The division and GTA online have some ridiculous bullet sponges which really breaks the immersion for me. Other games such as the crew 2 have some really repetitive mechanics where you need to grind a lot to progress. Other games like Marvel's Avengers, Outriders, recent Ghost recon games and many others have been so bad that those game are barely worth playing. I mean if you line a headshot it takes six or seven bullets to put down an enemy. It makes the game suck and kills a lot the enjoyment despite the fact that games such as the division have really gorgeous worlds to wonder about and explore. From my point of view Jim Ryan is doing to Sony now what Don Matrick did to the Xbox one. It remains to be seen how much will sony fans will be willing to swallow this but I really think they will start voicing their opinions once these live service game launch. I really hope that Microsoft finally delivers a steady stream of content to be excited for next week, otherwise I really am concerned where the gaming industry greed and game direction is going
I agree with this comment, but there are definitely a lot more successful live service games than just Destiny and GTA online. Fortnite is arguably more successful than Destiny and so is CoD Warzone, etc.
Live Service games if done right are great, but so few are when compared to standard multiplayer or single-player games. A large majority completely fail. Going all-in on live service games instead of gradual growth one game at a time… Sony is going to have their live service games be unprofitable more than not. What I wanted more from Sony 1st party is less over the shoulder 3rd party story-driven linear games and more of everything else. More Japanese developed games, more smaller titles, more action game variety, and an expansion of RPG’s, action-adventure games, shooters, party games, ETC. There is a lot of growth opportunity outsides of live service titles.
going down the live service road could back fire as all the streaming services like disney+ etc are loosing money hand over fist (i think in the last quarter of 22 they lost $1.5b) as ppl decide they dont need 5 or 6 streaming services at $15-$25 a month and as its an industry others will look at sony and go "oh look at the money they are making , lets get on that bandwagon" so the sector gets saturated and ppl start making choices (again) so some companies will struggle or may even shut down and if sony are looking at this to make money AND for the studios to fund further single player games this if it starts going wrong affect future projects as it will take awhile to turn the studios away from live services again.
I'm definitely regretting buying a PS5. Mostly because I have a great PC that I enjoy using over a console. Also I have no interest in live service games.
Dont worry, Its Sony they will try to sell a live service game, not give it for free like the rest, so the first couple wont sell well, plus we know Sony sucks at online service, Sony will learn the lesson that we dont want this live service shit and go back to making there bread and butter of single player games.
People complained that Sony only makes 3rd person narrative driven game and they don't innovate. Now that they're trying different everyone's telling them to go back to making 3rd person narrative driven game lmao.
Thank god I bought a switch, I thought it was a Bad decision because I barely use it and wanted a Ps5 but seems like Sony made me want to stick to the ps4 and use my switch more for future games. Plus ps5 games are also releasing on the switch.
All this wasted time and money. Probly wont be until ps6 that they learn no one wants this. I barely have time for Destiny 2 and Splatoon 3. I am not bothering with ANY other live service. EVER.
I hate this live service push for games, everything has to have a battle pass with daily, weekly challenges that if you don't do you'll miss out. I'd rather there be studios making a variety of new games instead of being a content factory for a live service game. I want games to go back to 20 years ago with private servers, developers releasing modding tools or at least map making tools.
I’m glad most of their live sevice games are from partner studios and new studios. The longer standing studios will be pumping out single player games, same with Bluepoint and housemarque most likely
They are making 2 different versions of Rainbow Six Extraction. Why? Live services cost a lot too. People don't talk about this Destiny 2 is over $1 Billion in development. Destiny 2 takes ~1000 people to make the content interesting enough to keep you hooked for that cosmetic that took 1 person 2 days to make for $20. CoD takes like 3000 people and way more money than any Sony exclusive per game to put out a game every year. Live service isn't cheap. I mean if they can do Horizon for $110 million and people say that is one of the most technologically advanced games in existance the single-player route doesn't look quite as expensive as people make it seem
Im gonna get flack for this. But i think the notion that Bungie is good at live service is false. I think that Bungie just got lucky. They have a good playerbase that they can keep satisfied with their content, but that doesn't mean that they'll be able to help another studio do the same with different content and different players Destiny players are specially dedicated to destiny
Bungie is good at live service for their own game. That doesn't mean that they can't help another developer become good as well in terms of the structure of releasing content. The content that gets created by the developer however is a different story entirely. All Bungie can do is guide other developers but they can't CREATE for others.
remember people : don't invest in any of these ideas, let them all flop, live services are never worth it at the end of the day, this isn't some old game expansions in early 2000s, they aren't, they're filled with egregious monetization schemes with no end while predatory in psychological manipulation to get u to spend, there's no good reason to invest just cause high graphics and from a brand u know, let them die off
personally i wouldn't mind them just making games that just look like ps4 graphics that just run better. horizon forbidden west is a great example. to keep cost a little lower and we can get games faster. besides we are at the point of diminishing returns anyways
Problem is gamers at least on console are obsessed with graphics that large companies are force to mag graphics always look better somehow instead of doing cool things with its existing technology
@@dreamsdeep1076 not just on the console side. people are using graphic cards that will never be used to their full potential and they just keep buying them. a card gen and a console gen are very different one last 8-10 years the other 2 years or so
@@davids2cents594 only a small percent of PC players have a card that is comparable closely to PS5 and Xbox series X/S. The rest are either stuck with PS4 level cards or lower. Most people on PC play more indies and AA games than AAA games compare to console players which is the opposite
I could personally care less I'm never putting money into live service games or time. Jusr stop and make actual games for once. I don't get why it's so hard
Live service is overly saturated, the same way mobile was overly saturated before it. How are all of these highly educated executives so far behind the times? Have they never talked to a human who actually plays games?
Games as goods >>>> Games as services/live services/streaming/cloud/subscriptions etc.. OWN your games (physical or DRM-free digital) and keep playing NOT keep paying.
All this does is leave out their base. That's teenage boys with limited cash flow, Mom and Dad are already paying for multiple streaming services because "Network" TV is not so good anymore. They're going to have to have full0time jobs just to pay for gaming. Are they ever going to be able to learn good spending habits when everyone wants cash from them? I'm 61 and don't bother with it my PS Extra account is all I need.
The difference between Sony and Microsoft is that Microsoft has all the money in the world because of their other services, that they could afford a lot of failures with their Games and still make enough money to buy every single major publisher under the planet. Sony doesn't have that. For Sony, PlayStation is their second most profitable business, that's why they desperately want their own "Fortnite" or their own "Call of Duty" because a stable revenue stream guarantees that even if all of their other games fail, they will make a solid profit.
Then there's Nintendo pretty much solely video games who are legends in gaming and the best there will ever be. Imagine if Nintendo was as rich as Sony or Microsoft? Nintendo earns their respect, Sony and Microsoft buy theirs.
Sony had a ENTIRE generation with absolutely no competition, they could have pushed innovation but choose not to. Xbox was just a broke division with no support while Sony banked everything Playstation needed.. They spent 10 years doing absolutely nothing, not even building the streaming/subscription service they got several years ago, before Game Pass even existed! They choose the minimum effort / maximum profit route, even their games became a reskin of the same formula. Now Microsoft decided to take xbox serious and I don't feel sad for Sony, quit protecting a company that spent the past 10 years being lazy without competition milking your money, rather than working harder to offer more.
I felt like we just went through this with NFTs. Consumers are screaming at these companies that we don't want this but yet they push forward with giant grins...
Sony is also looking at implementing NFTs into their video games according to patents they filed. Wouldn't be surprised if they implemented NFTs into at least one of these live service games at some point, though under a different name.
The best thing to do (and this is with every company ever) is to hit them in the wallet. You mess with the money and change comes and it comes fast.
@@jimmythegamer2231 just because they file patents does not mean they plan to use them, it often is just so other people can't use them, or so they have to pay them to use them
@@charsquatch600 Doesn't mean they plan to use them, but the fact that they are even considering it is concerning in and of itself.
@@jimmythegamer2231 as I said, them making a patent doesn't mean they are considering it either. It just means their lawyer had an idea that they wanted to patent
I used to complain that first party Sony needed more online multiplayer games but..
Not like this, not like this…
The focus on live service games is a mistake.
This live-service push, in conjuction with them shutting down some of my favorite studios like Japan Studio is really making me question why I even own a PS5. If this is the direction Sony is heading in, I don't see myself sticking around for the PS6.
I agree. If the single player games are gone...so am I.
For me, I probably have enough PS4 games and even a few PS3 games (like Prototype) in my backlog to weather this misguided direction Sony is taking. It's also a great idea to have another system to run to. Rescue me, TOTK!
I Hope they fail horribly and reconsider and make a great comeback one day. The PS5 is an amazing console that’s never used to it’s full potential and it makes me so sad
@@swaeshow WHat are you going to stop gaming? I don't think Sony single player games are going anywhere and while they are good they take so long to make. Do you only play the exclusives or?
This is why I stick with PC
Sony push into esports kind of feel flat. Kind of unbelievable they would push this hard when so many live service games seem to crash almost instantly
People just want to play a game. Complete it and move on to the next game. Maybe dabble in some online from time to time. Unless you're still at school nobody has the time to put in hundreds and hundreds of hours into 8-10 different live services.
But isnt that the reason these games exist? Games you can play when u have time for ever?
Single player games aren’t as profitable. The only reason they make games like god of war is to get you in their ecosystem for the live service games that make the real money.
Mario Kart and smash bros can get away with this....
But they are already complete games when they were released anyway
I'm not defending lhese live service games, but why does everyone assume you need to play them all at once?
@@ganymedehedgehog371 don’t play MP nor live-service games. Only single player games from some AAA games and indies
Looks like Sony isn't interested in me because I won't spend a penny on this live service bs.
I am really concerned that Sony is going totally away from the games I like. Part of the reason I have been focused on my PS3 collection.
I agree in a way, but we still have great studios like sucker punch, insomniac, square Enix. We're lucky, not every game is for us but I do miss more of the anime titles that were good.
Sony have to adapt though. They mostly focus on making one type of game, they need to diversify their investments. Im not fan of live service games, unless it's older mmorpg's with a monthly subscription they could bring out something decent.
Just look at all Hermen Hulst interviews for the past 3 years, They aren't stopping making SP games, they are just adding MP games on the top, and those new studios (Haven, Firewalk, Bungie) for MP console and PC, + Lasengle and Savage Studio for mobile, were bought for that task without dragging the current and old studios into the live service/mobile madness. They are expanding, not converting. The only problem with Sony though is the communication.. we have no idea what their next projects looks like yet, except Insomniac and 3rd party remakes and deals..
They still making single player games at the same pace they just making MORE live aervice on top of it.
and they need to somehow make more money especially that CoD ia going away because of their investors
Spawn wave has always said. For a company like Sony, all it needs is 1 success out of 10 attempts for them to make lots of money for this to be all worth it
....but what happens when ALL 10 fail miserably?
@@Matanumi Then they're screwed because Sony is then left with 5-6 first-party studios that are dedicated exclusively to making live service games. They wouldn't be good at making singleplayer titles.
Sure if in the console space you make a Fortnite, Minecraft, Overwatch, Warzone or PUBG (even then, all those games are largely PC/mobile-based audiences), but everything else… No.
Also if Sony had 10 games developed making other kind of games, the odds are they all make money and overall it is more profitable.
@@jimmythegamer2231 Everyone at one point wasn't good at something.
Don't be ignorant in saying that a developer that specializes in live service games wouldn't be able to create a great single player game in the future.
@@PSYCHOV3N0M I'm not saying there's no way they'll ever be successful at making a singleplayer game, but it will be very difficult for a studio trained to make live service games to pivot into a different genre entirely. Most singleplayer studios are having major issues developing live service games - such as Arcane, Naughty Dog, Rocksteady, etc. - so the opposite would probably apply as well.
Awesome! I can’t think of anything I’m less excited about, apart from the fact it’s June right now.
I don't like how they're pushing for live services more. It just makes them look greedy and money-driven instead of passionate about making high quality games from our beloved franchises. I'm sure at least a handful of these live services focused games might yield the profit numbers they're looking for. But gamers are generally not going to like this trend.
Mine too. I don’t think I’ll be planning for other live service games that I’m interested anytime soon.
Because they’re mostly not passionate about making high quality games.
I understand why they are doing it. They already have their games in a good place so now they want to focus on their live service end. Xbox has a good live service up and running so now they are going to get their games in a good place.
thats because they are "greedy and money driven" if they thought they could get away with recycling the same game over and over like call of duty they absolutely would.
Everything fony did this gen was money driven. This is just another "for the payer" move. ☮️
What I think about their push for live service games? This makes me not want to buy a PS5.
How you spend your money is YOUR power.
The sad part is that this live service push probably isn't gonna stop anytime soon. Live service games have proven that, when successful, they can be some of the most successful games for a company in years or ever. Epic Games might've been a known presence before Fortnite with Unreal Engine and Unreal Tournament, but Fortnite is what made them truly big. It's their most successful IP by a landslide. Another example is Apex Legends which is EA's premier shooter and one of the big three battle royales. When a live service is successful, it becomes a developer's/publisher's crowning jewel simply due to the profit it makes. You might think about how for every successful live service there are 5 failures, but the issue with that is that a majority of those failures are from smaller publishers or even indies sometimes. Knockout City was an EA published indie that eventually went self-published, Spellbreak and Rumbleverse were indies with Epic Games endorsement, and there are tons of other examples on top of this, and most of them result in the closure of a studio, heck out of those examples only Knockout City's developer Velan Studios didn't close and that could very well be because they made Mario Kart Live Home Circuit which gave them good insurance. Even the triple A's aren't safe, Hyper Scape was Ubisoft's attempt and it didn't live long at all. But the issue is that we're talking Sony here, one of the biggest names in gaming, one of the biggest console manufacturers of all time, and as a result, they have a LOT of money to throw at the wall to try and get that single successful live service. Until they get that, they could theoretically go with this as long as they like, or as long as it takes to convince them that they'll never get a successful live service. Their single player games are what they're known for in the core gaming world, but casual people who play stuff like FIFA or CoD likely don't know or care about something like Horizon too much. If they can get a single live service that successfully attracts the casual crowd, it'll easily pay for all of the potential failures they had before. So until they either fail so much that they give up or they succeed, I doubt this'll stop soon. And it sucks.
woah wall of text.
It stops when you (and mass consumer) stop wasting your money towards this
@@Matanumi That's the point. Mass consumers won't stop because they don't care. They don't care about spending millions of dollars on mtx and live service games unfortunately.
@@Matanumi Sadly it won't matter since they only need a small number of whales to make most of their money. So they will begin making games that cater to the whales rather than us.
Doesn't matter.
F2P games is a successful monetary model that makes TONS of money for mobile games publishers, but console and PC gamers mostly have rejected it.
NFTs and crypto gaming would have made insane amounts of money for corporate publishers and their greedy useless rich shareholder investers....but the majority of console and pc gamers have rejected it.
Loot boxes made unimaginable amounts of money for EA and Activision, but eventually console and PC gamers fought back and rejected it.
Games as a service is the next most harmful and biggest push corporations are trying to get through, I have already rejected Games as a service/streaming/cloud/subscriptions and I know the majority of gamers will reject it.
Also money talks, if all the major publishers go all out with Games as a service, other companies would be more than happy to cater to gamers who don't want any of that $#!t.
Sony:”We got em now!”
I remember a lot of PS fans saying these live service games were being made just to fund PS single player games... some people are so naive.
The problem with Sony's GAAS push is they will be putting out so many GAAS games in the next couple years (12 games) that they will easily overlap, and in turn, likely eat each another's possible user base. People that tend to play GAAS only focus on one or two games not 6+. So, games may never reach potential even if one could have as its potential base us being taken away from a similar Sony GASS game . And you can only keep so many balls in the air trying to juggle all while trying to gain traction. Sony will be lucky if they even get one half-way successful game. The odds are it will be a game from another company no one so coming that is the next big thing anyways. You know organic.
Plus, unlike normal games, after release your teams moves to work on other projects. The GAAS team is constantly kept to keep content flowing. That means in most cases that the developer is locked down and focused on that game only. And GAAS games that are very successful can die quite quickly, PUBG was king than it wasn't (1.5 million daily users on steam to now 120k). Sony could get PUBG success, celebrate, put all their eggs in that basket as with great numbres.. Then (out of the blue) comes a Fortnite and everybody moves on in a matter of months. Like PUBG that would most of those gamers. Plus, with 12 games that Sony has plans to release (possibly more in planning stages) I don't see Sony sticking around too long supporting any GAAS game if they have very little traction. A year and if no traction it is gone. But the problem is several very popular GAAS games took years to gain traction. That also breeds distrust among users. Sort of like how Google is now not trusted to support its products and shut them down unless they are immediately successful may taint how users view Sony's GAAS offerings after a while.
Guerrilla should give a Live Service KillZone a try. It has a very unique feel to it. They just need to support it more this time
I never liked the characters of Killzone, but found the world very intriguing. So... a persistent live-service Killzone world could be interesting.
I hate live service games, they are a cancer in the industry, made purely to be exploitative in nature and extract as much money out of the player as possible.
They are essentially doing the opposite of Xbox. They already have there games in a solid place so now they are going to get there live service up to snuff. And since Xbox has their live service up and running pretty well now they are going to focus on making good games for now.
It flips every generation. I think this gen will be the opposite of the PS3/360 generation
@@jimmythegamer2231 this is a weird generation on every end
-Microsoft is recovering and rebuilding slowly to form a new Xbox identity that has incredible potential
-Sony has a half dozen amazing established PlayStation studios, a few rising studios but lost all their Japanese talent and has questionable leadership decisions for their future
-Nintendo keeps improving its dozen established 1st party studios and most its established IP’s while making stupid money
Live service is gonna destroy Sony and is so dumb all they’re doing is following trends and their first live service the last of us multiplayer might just get canceled what a great way to start it’s almost like most gamers don’t like this garbage 🗑️
Most gamers don’t have to like it. Only enough that spend have to like it. The people that don’t like it are irrelevant as long as they hit the desired revenue.
If only people weren't playing as much Fortnite, Apex Legends, Warzone, Genshin Impact, or Overwatch 2 and spending loads of money while doing so and so on, maybe, just maybe Sony (or whatever other publisher) wouldn't consider making their own stuff to expand by buying new studios for that specific task without asking all their old studios to go that path...🥴 Expanding =/= Converting
This push for live service games by Sony is purely motivated by profit. They're taking the media art form of game development and transforming it into a cookie cutter production where their studios just pump out one live service game after another in hopes of catching lightning in a bottle. It's honestly pretty gross to see as an older gamer.
I'd say there all going to stumble cause sonys audience demands premium experiences and is willing to pay for it. These trash service games will not go over well
I have to ask, what happens if they all fail to be extremely profitable?
Because these games are high risk.
They won't if they're free to play and have an audience because the biggest spenders combined usually ends up giving them more money than it takes to upkeep servers and other perpetual resources. The biggest recent flops was down to either it being pre-paid, or poorly marketed.
Pre-paid on console puts up two barriers at once, the game's upfront fee and the online subscription service so that doesn't maximise potential players at all.
They're high-risk but from their point of view can also be high return if they get people invested.
Well, they're hoping that at least a few turn out to be profitable which will cover the cost of the others plus more. If they all turn out to be failures then they will have to eat the losses, or if they're lucky at least manage to break even.
It appears to be a blessing that I missed the PS4 Gen because now I have a massive back catalog to play through, especially since the future seems to be looking more unappealing.
Makes me really sad to see them push this so much. I play an mmo as a steady game, but other than that, I play exclusively single player games.
This will be a disaster.
A 60% investment sound to me way too risky if i may say. I mean, taking into account most people here have an objection to make about live service games.
Damn, that's crazy
[Back to playing Zelda]
The only way Live service can be done right is being a Free game. I just see Sony being Greedy and thinking it's ok to pull an Anthem and charging for the game and still expect for you to spend tons of money on content. I think they will be humbled real quick. There's only so much room for live service until it gets watered down. Just look at tv live services. Everybody wanted in on the Netflix action and they all mostly bleeding.
@exoo if you think Sony can make a successful MMORPG out of an established franchise that grosses over 10 billion lifetime like was done with Warcraft or Final Fantasy you are living in a fantasy land. None of Sony’s IP’s are big enough to net anywhere near that.
Are sony and microsoft not seeing what Nintendo is doing? Xenoblade? Zelda? Did sony not see how well god of war did? Don’t these guys realize we just want good games, no microtransactions, and the online component should be fun-first? They stand to make far more money by churning out constant high quality games instead of live service games. Dont they know gamers stick to 1, maybe 2, live service games at a time? I don’t know man. This constant thirst for money and growth makes sense but it’ll be the gamers that won’t keep up. Just make some games, guys. It really is all we want. We’ll buy the consoles, just make some games.
As long as gamers keep expecting better graphics, budgets for games will keep moving up and the more safe games coming out
Games like COD and Destiny 2 make more money than Zelda, and apart from that, they are games that continue forever and provide constant income. PlayStation and Nintendo have a totally different business model and with all those gold games Nintendo release they are still far behind Sony in terms of revenue.
@@dreamsdeep1076 yes but these live service games are not a safe bet
@@LeonWagg this is not true if you only look at gaming (sony is massive). They’re closer than you’d think because Nintendo also profits on the system.
@@reahslademhA No, I'm talking only about SIE (PlayStation) and not Sony as a whole. PS is the number one in terms of revenue and market share. This is just a fact.
They should just drop the factions mode as it is and update it for awhile. If it’s fun enough it’ll stick
It didn't work for Halo Infinite
I’ve been gaming for over 40 years. I can only speak for myself, but to me.. the future of gaming is in single player immersive experiences. Not games where the immersion is destroyed by some troll named DeezNutz69. Sony is going to lose money chasing this unicorn & rightfully so. They’re ignoring their player base!
It doesn't help with optics as they also had leaned towards NFT, so it definitely spooks me to make me wonder if whether NFTs will be incorporated with these live services.
I will put both my balls on the line in saying this. You cry about NFT’s, BUT YOU WILL be utilizing NFT/crypto tech whether you know it or not sometime in your life.
People like you who knows nothing about the innovation behind crypto, I guarantee you, you will be utilizing crypto whether you like it or not. You won’t have a choice.
If you move money overseas, buy real estate or a car as an example, and you sign a digital contract- right then and there BOOM your signature is minted as an NFT while that particular property is tokenized.
Anything that is of value can and will be tokenized on the blockchain.
Within real estate as an example, Via an NFT code, gone are the days of sifting through paperwork or emails and buyers can easily view information of former owners, tax rates and any other legality issues that may arise.
And all this is done via a simple NFT code. As a Landlord (still purchasing real estate) and business owner, I can appreciate and see how much more streamlined real areas of life can benefit from blockchain technology.
So, I would argue that NFT’s in video games are preparing you for real world implementation of the technology. Because let me tell you now, real estate and other sectors within housing are already utilizing crypto tech like XRP to tokenize land. This is only the beginning.
Well next 5 years will be interesting
This Live Service Push will pave the way for their downfall, I have no doubt about this.
That's a bit hyperbolic, but I don't like it
It will be the downfall of any game console. Apart from Multiplayer FPS players, literally no one wants this.
Lmao, that’s what people said about the internet when the US government tried to stop it. They resisted but the dam wall broke and they were forced to innovate or get left behind.
Live service clearly makes money. As an equities investor in these companies, they aren’t dumb. They know where the money is!
How's it hyperbolic? They're pushing 10 frickin live service games in the next 5 years. TEN... GAAS...
T
E
N
We can hope so
Oh. Yay. More nickel and diming.
Live service is just killing gaming for me. I’m gonna be 38 and just lost my passion for gaming in the last 10 years
Honestly, just ignore the current gen. Look towards the past for interesting games. PS1, PS2, and PS3 generation have the best you're gonna get.
@@THATCANADIANDUDE682 based on the value of my collection, that seems to be the go to for most people nowadays.
Just go Nintendo :). They have no live service games, apart from maybe something like Pokémon which feels like a live service game with all the yearly releases.
@@THATCANADIANDUDE682 Most of those old gen games aren't that great anymore IMO (save for PS3/360 era games, which still hold up). A lot of those PS1 and PS2 games have aged like milk, especially the ones attempting to be realistic. GTA 3 and San Andreas for instance are not that great anymore. I was bored to death playing them due to how little interactivity there is compared to latter titles in the series. I'd much rather play a more modern game like GTA 4, GTA 5 or RDR2. I feel like a lot of old-school gamers are clouded by nostalgia and conveniently ignore literally any good modern game to fit their narratives.
Oh and the original Resident Evil 2 on PS1 is also pretty mediocre nowadays. Back then it was amazing, but nowadays it would be rated as a 6/10 game at best.
I imagine I'll get a lot of hate for this comment because of the unpopular opinion I have.
@@Markde9876 Splatoon, Mario Kart 8, Super Smash Bros Ultimate, Kirby Fighters, Pokemon Cafe Mix, etc are all live service games from Nintendo. I don't know what you're talking about lol.
Anyone feel Sony is getting a LITTLE cocky? I think they need to be careful.
Dickest move of all time... Sony pushing live service crap makes me mad.
The chart showing what’s on each side of the fence sums up my disappointment. Instead of guerrilla and naughty dog working on something I will probably be interested in, they are working on something I probably won’t be interested in. And that’s a big concern when that’s two of Sony’s top talent studios.
Bend Studio is also working on a live service game of some sort instead of Days Gone 2.
We need Shawn Layden back 😢
press X to Shaun?
“It’s certainly the tightrope being walked by Sony, and I’m hoping they don’t fall off midway through…” I do hope that they fall off. Sony shifting their focus to Live-Service games is an artistically flaccid and ethically bankrupt decision.
In a nutshell, they can keep them. Not interested in paying continuously to play one game thks.
I won’t. I play a game, if I like it, I’ll finish it and maybe 100%. Done and move on to next game. Unless if it’s DLC or the game has replay value I don’t want to keep playing the same game over and over again when I can play other titles
Try to say that to Sony's investors with all the data they get from people spending in BattlePass, DLCs and skins among the most played games on their own plaform with 3rd party like, Fortnite, Warzone, Genshin Impact, PUBG, Overwatch 2, FF14, Apex Legends and so on. Most of the money PS make each quarter and year is from those 3rd party GAAS games, basically funding those SP games we love so much as the cost to make them just continue to grow.. They expand and bought studio for that specific task without asking every other of their older studios to follow that path, they are adding MP without substracting the SP part.
@@SergentXII If you look at that investment graph of Sony’s you’ll see live service budget increasing massively over the next two years while single player stays level with 2018-19 spend. Given inflation running so high, the *actual* investment decreases as a percentage of development resource. Look how many studios had to give up making IP at AB so they can keep on top of annual COD development for example. If Sony are making 12 LS games, that’s 12 teams tied up for the next few years on content drip and if as you say it’s where Sony makes all its money, they’re obviously going to prop this up at the expense of low profit SP games. All because they shut all their AA studios who knew how to make great games that *didnt* cost £250m in pursuit of Nintendo-like IP sales. Oops.
I dont want a ton of live services from them... thats not what i bought a ps5 for
Live service games stink
Who's gonna go under first square or sony.
I feel like Sony is going to alienate their existing player base while pandering to the younger Fortnite generation.
None of the live service games I will play
Sold my PS5 today and kept my Series X. PS isn't the same anymore like the PS2 and PS3 days
After the ps2 I left ps. Good decision. Missed nothing. ☮️
Good on you, I've been playing on Switch alot more than my PS5 and Xbox Series X. Nintendo actually have real games compared to these two giants.
Lol yikes. Good luck with Halo 8 & Gears of War 11 . . .
@@jaysony8587 Don't care about none of those games I play mostly 3rd party and use my Series X for emulation
@@Retro_Gamer_89 point went over your head but ok that’s cool tho!
I want the PS4 sony back desperately
The one that had us buy a platform for Exclusives and then latter on they made that platform irrelevant because they released those Exclusives on PC? NO! i want what i buy to remain relevant
@@Force-Multiplier sony fuckboys malding over a superior platform making their 400 little toy box pointless.
@@Force-Multiplier Stop talking out of your ass.
Sony games coming to PC doesn't hurt PlayStation gamers' enjoyment of Sony games.
@@Force-Multiplier I just want them to focus on narrative games. I don’t mind them making 1-3 online games to try to catch a good one but I think it’s over kill at this moment. I don’t really care about games going to PC personally, as long as their great games, let PC gamers experience them and give the devs more sales to green light future projects. IMO
@@rrice3142 then you get a situation where you're trapped in an inferior system to get "exclusives" that aren't really exclusives when you could be playing on a better system from the start (aka PC)
as for the narrative part ... you haven't payed much attention to PS3 games from what im getting because many PS3 exclusives where already heavy on their narrative heck it all started there with The Last of Us
I hope every one of their live service games fail to be honest. Because I think the games are just genuinely, painfully, mediocre. Even Haven's game that we haven't even seen yet looks like a flop just waiting to happen. And I mean it just seems like a bad idea for a console developer to make that many live service games. They're exclusive to your platform so they're all competing again each other in a way single player games just do not.
Spend this money to make cool, creative, AA games to supplement your big AAA games instead of this bullshit.
How does a multimillion dollar company not know that most gamers don't like live-service games? On top of that, they're coming out with so many when the main issue with live-service games besides the monetization is the time - each one takes time, which with so many planned to release by PlayStation, it's going to be hard to divide time into. Most will flop watch.
how things will end up is pretty simple: there's a point where it tips, there's a point where it breaks, there's a point where it bends, and a point we just can't take, anymore.
Once again love your analysis of the gaming landscape!
As a gamer, and a ps5 owner, I give zero shits about Sonys direction right now. I need to see more single player stuff. I'll be heavily distracted by Starfield regardless of its quality versus Skyrim or Fallout,and maybe still Zelda, so they have to work hard to keep my attention. And I really want to see more for my PSVR2
Spiderman 2 looks great but I didn't finish the first or miles morales.
Jim Ryan needs to leave playstation
Of course live service games will show more profit for them. They’re only releasing like 1 or 2 games a year it seems
Haven is unknown? They're mostly a bunch of ex-Ubisoft employees that decided to go off on their own and make Ubisoft games in DNA only. So that's how Haven's game will play, run and feel when you start that game. The trailer gave you hints 😒
This is one of the major reasons I haven't felt a need to get a ps5. I've noticed the changes and they've moved so far away from what made them successful. I'm sticking to PC and Nintendo. I see no reason to get a ps5 and I can play Xbox games on my pc.
You can play Nintendo games on your PC too. Don't get a Switch, get a Steam Deck instead.
@@jimmythegamer2231 I have both. Lol
PlayStation is coming over to pc so I don’t see why to own consoles other than collection sake
@@ghost-type Oh okay lol. Then I don't see any reason to own a Nintendo Switch when the Steam Deck is better in every way except maybe battery life.
That being said, you probably will need to get a Switch 2 as you won't be able to emulate Switch 2 games for at least several years depending on how powerful (or how weak) the console is.
@@jimmythegamer2231 Yeah, I've had a Switch for a while now so once I get got my Steam Deck, I didn't really put much time into it, but I'll definitely be getting the Switch 2 or whatever they call it.
This is unfortunate
"Live service" types have their place (it started with MMORPGs), the problem, like with ANY type of game, is when the industry as a whole, ALL jump on that bandwagon and saturate the HELL out of the market with that ONE type of game that drives players to get really sick of it. It happened with Boomer Shooters, MMORPG's, and Mil-Sim FPS's (And im sure many more im forgetting). Even now im seeing alot of live service fatigue and many of them are failing right out of the gate. Not sure why Sony thinks this is a good idea to dump that much of their focus and investment into it. Its like they are not reading the social market.
What's a "Boomer Shooter?" That sounds funny.👍😂
@@brandonfarfan1978 yikes.
Ask Avengers and Anthem and many more live services how there games went I think its a huge mistake its going to end in failure.
Sean, what exactly are you trying to instigate?
I wish the gaming industry could get back to the 00's era vibe. When game magazine's had demo discs. They'd dive into game development stuff. I just miss seeing the behind the scenes stuff. The process of putting ideas together & finding out what works best through using a play testing process. I think companies need to show glimpses of gameplay more and stop with all this "radio silence route that game companies take now.. its awful." Their current approach is definitely creating this sorta reverse psychology effect because they just aren't approaching how to handle the gaming world "in these long spaces between game's." While projects are being worked on sorta thing. The entire gaming industry needs to find better ways to approach & do these things. It will benefit gaming as a whole. The companies & the customers will be in a better place. We gotta improve things. If they want to keep making $$$ they gotta improve things.
As for budgets, don’t you think if GOW Ragnarok or Horizon Forbidden West were half the size it would have actually been ok, or even better? I’ve finished both games but the size and bloat puts me off ever wanting to play them ever again. However a game like GOW 2018 being much smaller I could see myself playing again.
Of all the teams they should have working on live service; why is naughty dog? They have fewer employees than a lot of their other studios. Also instead of pushing for live service MULTIPLAYER titles that are free and easy to access. Why can’t they just develop multiplayer into their current single player games. This ultimately can allow you to still create add-ons for these games. The add-ons can expand single player and multiplayer.
Naughty Dog wanted Factions as it's own thing. They made the call, not Sony this time. If it had stayed with Last of Us Part 2 we'd have it by now and be done with it. Go be mad at Naughty Dog for their decision.
Naughty dog is my favorite developer. I’m not mad by any means either. I just know that once they get full swing all my hope for a jak sequel, uncharted sequel, and potentially the last of us part 3 will be low. Dev time already takes forever. If they could really add to the lore of the main storyline with factions. They would heavily benefit. I would wait until part 3 to drop factions
Sony is changing and some don’t like it.
Live services games are an old trend, look at EA and Capcom, they realized that
The only one live service that managed to really be successful was destiny and GTA online. The others, while they still have a good player base never really managed to become a huge phenomenon. Problem is that even though there is a huge multiplayer audience for games I really think that the market is pretty saturated and having more than a dozen titles in this direction will literally kill the income stream for sony down the line. The thing is that I do not really see any live service game working with bullet sponges and without microtransactions. I did not like destiny. The division and GTA online have some ridiculous bullet sponges which really breaks the immersion for me. Other games such as the crew 2 have some really repetitive mechanics where you need to grind a lot to progress. Other games like Marvel's Avengers, Outriders, recent Ghost recon games and many others have been so bad that those game are barely worth playing. I mean if you line a headshot it takes six or seven bullets to put down an enemy. It makes the game suck and kills a lot the enjoyment despite the fact that games such as the division have really gorgeous worlds to wonder about and explore. From my point of view Jim Ryan is doing to Sony now what Don Matrick did to the Xbox one. It remains to be seen how much will sony fans will be willing to swallow this but I really think they will start voicing their opinions once these live service game launch. I really hope that Microsoft finally delivers a steady stream of content to be excited for next week, otherwise I really am concerned where the gaming industry greed and game direction is going
I agree with this comment, but there are definitely a lot more successful live service games than just Destiny and GTA online. Fortnite is arguably more successful than Destiny and so is CoD Warzone, etc.
It sounds like Diablo 4 is going to be a live service game kinda like destiny once the quarterly seasons release
Live Service games if done right are great, but so few are when compared to standard multiplayer or single-player games. A large majority completely fail. Going all-in on live service games instead of gradual growth one game at a time… Sony is going to have their live service games be unprofitable more than not.
What I wanted more from Sony 1st party is less over the shoulder 3rd party story-driven linear games and more of everything else. More Japanese developed games, more smaller titles, more action game variety, and an expansion of RPG’s, action-adventure games, shooters, party games, ETC. There is a lot of growth opportunity outsides of live service titles.
going down the live service road could back fire as all the streaming services like disney+ etc are loosing money hand over fist (i think in the last quarter of 22 they lost $1.5b) as ppl decide they dont need 5 or 6 streaming services at $15-$25 a month and as its an industry others will look at sony and go "oh look at the money they are making , lets get on that bandwagon" so the sector gets saturated and ppl start making choices (again) so some companies will struggle or may even shut down and if sony are looking at this to make money AND for the studios to fund further single player games this if it starts going wrong affect future projects as it will take awhile to turn the studios away from live services again.
I'm definitely regretting buying a PS5. Mostly because I have a great PC that I enjoy using over a console. Also I have no interest in live service games.
An amazing single player experience doesn’t translate well into a money pit trashcan live service game. Who woulda thought?
Dont worry, Its Sony they will try to sell a live service game, not give it for free like the rest, so the first couple wont sell well, plus we know Sony sucks at online service, Sony will learn the lesson that we dont want this live service shit and go back to making there bread and butter of single player games.
As if Sony didn't learn from EA
Lbh people gonna complain and STILL buy thier products even when its mid.. Who really cares???
Everyone’s so excited about marathon but it’s nothing like the game it used to be and is pvp only.
People complained that Sony only makes 3rd person narrative driven game and they don't innovate. Now that they're trying different everyone's telling them to go back to making 3rd person narrative driven game lmao.
Thank god I bought a switch, I thought it was a Bad decision because I barely use it and wanted a Ps5 but seems like Sony made me want to stick to the ps4 and use my switch more for future games. Plus ps5 games are also releasing on the switch.
All this wasted time and money. Probly wont be until ps6 that they learn no one wants this. I barely have time for Destiny 2 and Splatoon 3. I am not bothering with ANY other live service. EVER.
Don’t except that excuse; expectations are no higher now than say 2010.
I hate this live service push for games, everything has to have a battle pass with daily, weekly challenges that if you don't do you'll miss out. I'd rather there be studios making a variety of new games instead of being a content factory for a live service game.
I want games to go back to 20 years ago with private servers, developers releasing modding tools or at least map making tools.
I’m glad most of their live sevice games are from partner studios and new studios. The longer standing studios will be pumping out single player games, same with Bluepoint and housemarque most likely
They are making 2 different versions of Rainbow Six Extraction. Why?
Live services cost a lot too. People don't talk about this Destiny 2 is over $1 Billion in development. Destiny 2 takes ~1000 people to make the content interesting enough to keep you hooked for that cosmetic that took 1 person 2 days to make for $20. CoD takes like 3000 people and way more money than any Sony exclusive per game to put out a game every year. Live service isn't cheap.
I mean if they can do Horizon for $110 million and people say that is one of the most technologically advanced games in existance the single-player route doesn't look quite as expensive as people make it seem
I'd love for you to say "PlayStation's Live service push is here but it's already dead (Omae Wa Mou Shindeiru)"
10 live service games by 2026? Hopefully there’s variety.
Im gonna get flack for this. But i think the notion that Bungie is good at live service is false.
I think that Bungie just got lucky. They have a good playerbase that they can keep satisfied with their content, but that doesn't mean that they'll be able to help another studio do the same with different content and different players
Destiny players are specially dedicated to destiny
Bungie is good at live service for their own game.
That doesn't mean that they can't help another developer become good as well in terms of the structure of releasing content.
The content that gets created by the developer however is a different story entirely.
All Bungie can do is guide other developers but they can't CREATE for others.
If they can deliver at least 1 or 2 awesome live service games and still their solo experiences im stoked
remember people : don't invest in any of these ideas, let them all flop, live services are never worth it at the end of the day, this isn't some old game expansions in early 2000s, they aren't, they're filled with egregious monetization schemes with no end while predatory in psychological manipulation to get u to spend, there's no good reason to invest just cause high graphics and from a brand u know, let them die off
personally i wouldn't mind them just making games that just look like ps4 graphics that just run better. horizon forbidden west is a great example. to keep cost a little lower and we can get games faster. besides we are at the point of diminishing returns anyways
Problem is gamers at least on console are obsessed with graphics that large companies are force to mag graphics always look better somehow instead of doing cool things with its existing technology
@@dreamsdeep1076 not just on the console side. people are using graphic cards that will never be used to their full potential and they just keep buying them. a card gen and a console gen are very different one last 8-10 years the other 2 years or so
@@davids2cents594 only a small percent of PC players have a card that is comparable closely to PS5 and Xbox series X/S. The rest are either stuck with PS4 level cards or lower. Most people on PC play more indies and AA games than AAA games compare to console players which is the opposite
I could personally care less I'm never putting money into live service games or time. Jusr stop and make actual games for once. I don't get why it's so hard
Live service is overly saturated, the same way mobile was overly saturated before it. How are all of these highly educated executives so far behind the times? Have they never talked to a human who actually plays games?
Im not interested in live service games
Games as goods >>>> Games as services/live services/streaming/cloud/subscriptions etc..
OWN your games (physical or DRM-free digital) and keep playing NOT keep paying.
All this does is leave out their base. That's teenage boys with limited cash flow, Mom and Dad are already paying for multiple streaming services because "Network" TV is not so good anymore. They're going to have to have full0time jobs just to pay for gaming. Are they ever going to be able to learn good spending habits when everyone wants cash from them? I'm 61 and don't bother with it my PS Extra account is all I need.
The difference between Sony and Microsoft is that Microsoft has all the money in the world because of their other services, that they could afford a lot of failures with their Games and still make enough money to buy every single major publisher under the planet. Sony doesn't have that. For Sony, PlayStation is their second most profitable business, that's why they desperately want their own "Fortnite" or their own "Call of Duty" because a stable revenue stream guarantees that even if all of their other games fail, they will make a solid profit.
I thought games/PS was Sony's primary business.
@@lycanwarrior2137 they also make other electronics like TVs
Then there's Nintendo pretty much solely video games who are legends in gaming and the best there will ever be. Imagine if Nintendo was as rich as Sony or Microsoft? Nintendo earns their respect, Sony and Microsoft buy theirs.
Sony had a ENTIRE generation with absolutely no competition, they could have pushed innovation but choose not to. Xbox was just a broke division with no support while Sony banked everything Playstation needed.. They spent 10 years doing absolutely nothing, not even building the streaming/subscription service they got several years ago, before Game Pass even existed! They choose the minimum effort / maximum profit route, even their games became a reskin of the same formula. Now Microsoft decided to take xbox serious and I don't feel sad for Sony, quit protecting a company that spent the past 10 years being lazy without competition milking your money, rather than working harder to offer more.
Pass on the live service. I’m only interested to see Ghosts of Tsushima, God of War Ragnarok, Forbidden West and Spider-Man 2 come to PC
I hope all those games fail