data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a7b64/a7b64de3b203debaa8dcf9cad2fffe844f2ddab9" alt="Reaction: Sony's PS5, PC Live Service Strategy Won't Work If It's All Samey Shooters 1"
We’ve been one of the few publications defending Sony’s live service strategy because we don’t think the idea is inherently bad. A lot of fans treat the booming Games as a Service segment as a genre, but it’s important to underline that it’s a business model instead. In fact, there’s enormous variety in the sector – no one would sanely say Rocket League is the same as Fortnite, for example – and it’s something PS Studios boss Hermen Hulst has alluded to himself.
But during last night’s PS Showcase, the platform holder didn’t help itself – in fact, it revealed two titles that fit the very definition of what sceptics feared its strategy would be all about. Aside from being tone-deaf, Fairgame$ looked like the blandest squad-based shooter this side of XDefiant and Hyenas – in fact, so generic did it appear, that you could quite literally have closed its trailer with the title card of either of those aforementioned titles and we wouldn’t have batted an eyelid.
Concord was arguably even more egregious, as while the vibes of Haven’s studio made us want to gag, we had to await a press release to understand what Firewalk’s debut is actually all about. TL;DR: it’s a sci-fi PVP shooter with a strong social focus, because of course it is. While we’ll maintain an open mind until more information is shared, neither project really struck us as particularly innovative or original – a huge issue in an increasingly competitive environment.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7ffd8/7ffd8d56f9bd47a726f9da860e5f8c3b99b62f04" alt="Reaction: Sony's PS5, PC Live Service Strategy Won't Work If It's All Samey Shooters 1"
Sony has said that it’s making 12 live service games for PS5 and PC, and it’ll almost certainly know they won’t all survive. This is quite literally a case of the platform holder throwing as much sh*t at the wall as it possibly can, knowing that it only needs one to stick to find its golden goose. The manufacturer’s spotted on its balance sheet that there are more people spending money on microtransactions than full-priced games these days, and it just needs one Fortnite-style hit.
The problem is that we’re slowly beginning to see the live service boom self-implode, and not even the good games can survive anymore. Take a title like Knockout City, which is a legitimately fun competitive effort with a novel concept that couldn’t sustain itself. Recently, we also got news that the vampire-based Bloodhunt was going to end support less than a year after release – it also failed to find an audience, despite having a pretty enticing alternative take on the Battle Royale concept.
If these games, with attractive and tangible identities of their own, can’t survive, then what hope does Sony’s seemingly copycat shooters have? Obviously the marketing muscle of PlayStation can’t be ignored, but both Fairgame$ and Concord are going to have to return to the drawing board when they’re ready to be re-revealed, because we’d argue last night’s CG trailers did more damage than good.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/127ca/127cad6e14808e229d7b5d3da5978af54b1d7b76" alt="Reaction: Sony's PS5, PC Live Service Strategy Won't Work If It's All Samey Shooters 1"
The biggest problem of all is that Sony did absolutely nothing to assuage the fears that fans have had ever since it announced its intent to develop a string of live service titles. As we said at the top of this article, Games as a Service is a business model and it’s not inherently bad: titles like Disney Dreamlight Valley and Genshin Impact may have obvious shortcomings, but they’re ever-expanding affairs with their own identities that fans play week-in-week-out because they always offer something new.
If all Sony is going to do is bankroll a bunch of shooters, then it’s got an uphill battle ahead of it. We’re not sure who’s signing the cheques, but we could have told the platform holder the response to Fairgame$ and Concord would be abysmal – and we’re not on seven digit salaries with market research diplomas in our back pocket. If the manufacturer truly believed this was the right way to introduce a controversial initiative, then it’s more out of touch than we ever imagined.
There’s still time for it to turn this around. While it will be yet another shooter, we have confidence The Last of Us’ standalone multiplayer game will have more than enough of an identity to entice players – although God only knows what’s going on with that. Hopefully, the handful of other titles it has in production are a bit more original. As we said at the top of this article, we’ve defended Sony’s live service strategy – but on the basis of last night’s showing, we’re going to find it a lot more difficult moving forward.
How are you feeling about Sony’s live service strategy now a couple of titles have been introduced? Are you happy with the software on show, or are you more concerned than ever about its decision to go down this path? Let it all out in the comments section below.
Comments 98
Copy and paste from Concord article:
PVP, F2P or paid FPS. The market is saturated at this point. Servers are being shut down for games less than two years old. Let's have some originality people, not just a fleeting payday!
The more complex the games are the less people will want to play them.
The whole strategy of games as a service is to force players to devote as much time/money to the game as possible, so it's really hard to persuade those players to leave their favorite game. Playstation has a really rough time ahead of them, if they're really going after that market. They really need something to set them apart and right now, they don't have anything, only time will tell, I guess, it just sucks what will happen with those teams when their projects don't pan out.
I like the PC strategy, dislike the live service strategy.
I'm actually really happy they are going this route, because when all these live service games bomb, they will realize just how much they need to stick with quality single-player gaming as their focus.
We already know Sony London live service game isn’t a shooter. It’s crazy PlayStation fans get mad when some xbox fans downplay Sony single player games by calling them one and done games . But the same PlayStation fans have no problem trashing theses live services games even before they get fully announced.
This is def a topic I see needing to be addressed. I'll hold out on the quality of the individual releases and their vibes (I personally think Foamstars or whatever looks far more "off" than Fairgames), but it's the lack of variety that's concerning.
If Foamstars was Sony 1st party and Fairgames was someone like Ubisoft? Different conversation. But Sony has LOADS of IP that could be developed into a fairly original offering (within the GaaS space). Like, we know full well Twisted Metal is likely going to be F2P GaaS, but where was that? It not being shown makes it likely it's not making a release to coincide with the show, like many assumed. So that's its own issue.
Twisted Metal, SOCOM, Jet Moto, Wipeout, Killzone, Motorstorm, Warhawk/Starhark... like it or not? All ripe for F2P GaaS. And likely able to bring something unique to the field. Then you of course have new offerings, but as stated, so far they're all just shooters.
But then also what about some left field options... what about a massive MMORPG version of Ape Escape? Get some of that Genshin Impact money with a fun-for-all-ages co-op romp collecting monkeys.
I'm concerned about the variety and breadth, not the model. And they haven't assuaged that fear for me.
I'm also going to say it, no matter what people here think: Sony-owned F2P GaaS titles should be like Destiny and be available on as many platforms as their technology can handle.
Removed - disrespecting others
Really disappointing that they closed down pixelopus and kept this stuff. People blame Jim for a lot of things but Herman Hurst is on charge of ps studios and need to start getting more heat. Really miss shu
Live Service games as has been stated is really hard to get just right. They are either to in your face asking for money, or you can just play the game and kind of ignore the add on’s. I think Sony will get this right at some point in the PS5’s life cycle. But what they showed yesterday is looking bad. Sony dev’s are in some cases a one trick pony, they make great action adventure story telling games and we all love those. They have very little studio support outside of Bungie that makes games that focus online. It’s a lot to ask Bungie to help build that culture with all the PS studios. It might rub off in time and i hope it does. Just from the start it will look a little rough from game to game. But that should not in anyway reduce the skills the dev’s have for making single player games and Spider-Man 2 showed that.
I thought Herman "fiercely daring" Hulst said it's not all Fortnite BR clones. And he was right! There's PvP extraction, there's PvP social, there's PvP with story, there's......other PvP extraction. Lots of unique variety! So fierce! So daring! So fiercely daring! #ryanout #hulstout #ShuForPrez
Jade promised (multiple times) something groundbreaking and genre defying! Fairgame$ doesn't look like any of those, in fact it looks like the exact opposite of those things. On top of that it has one of the worst names I've seen recently, way worst than Forspoken!
It was a bad showing. No doubt. The most interesting sounding of these live service games was a no-show (Factions) and the ones that were there looked as bland as possible.
Personally I was hoping to see something like an AC Valhalla live service. A big single player game with ongoing support. Sure Valhalla wasn't perfect but I liked the idea of it. Instead we got Fairgame$...
Also, I want to gag every time I see the word "Fairgame$". It's like the video game title equivalent of wearing Crocs and a fanny pack.
They are making 12 live service games? Then how will they have any resources to make single player games? Looks PS5 Gen will be live service mostly from Sony first party. We may get 3-4 more single player games at this point this Gen and that's about it from Sony Studios.
Both games are already dead. Sony is too late to the party with live services now, they own Destiny so focus on that instead of creating live service games no one cares for or wants.
@Korgon Factions is the only live service title i care for from Sony and that's because ND won't just make a bog standard by the books title, it will no doubt offer something more and be really good.
I've tried to break down what their live service will be now.
Haven: Fairgame$
Arrowhead: Helldivers 2
Firewalk: Concord
Naughty Dog: TLOU Factions
Bungie: Marathon
San Diego: MLB
FireSprite: Twisted Metal
Insomniac: Unknown multiplayer game
Sucker Punch: Possible GoT Legends spinoff
Guerrilla: Horizon multiplayer, possible mobile MMO with external dev
London Studio: Melee combat PVP game
That's the best I can come up with.
@Chaudy horizon 3, bluepoint, ghost 2, Sony bend game, naughty dog new ip, Sony Santa Monica new ip all single player focus games.
Hulst is in over his head with this live service stuff. They're gonna trend chase to a bunch of flops, punish the people making them and alienate their core single player base all at the same time. This is a gigantic risk and they've done zero to calm any concerns.
The only one that you can have any hope for is Factions and that's only because of TLOU brand power, Naughty Dog hasn't made a multiplayer game since 2016 (UC4).
They even took the Jade Raymond bait, who's bounced from studio to studio and hasn't gotten a game out the door in over a decade.
I'd have less concern and not say as much about them trend chasing if they actually announced more single player story exclusives because at this point, they make it seem like the live service games are taking over.
@Americansamurai1 Nimbo Jimbo and Hermen do this hand in hand, obviously given their head by Tokyo, but with the clear target to earn the money for the whole Sony Group. I see 3 generations of PS games:
1) Goofy Japanese, which is missed by many and was replaced by 2) Third-person Cinematic Action-Adventures, the today’s signature genre for SIE. And now we enter 3) Live Service. At least it will be interesting to follow what’s happening!
The article hits the nail on the head, they only need one or two of these live service games to gain any traction and then the rest will be dropped if they aren't making any money.
Honestly I couldn't care less about anything that was shown, more PvP shooters is just getting ridiculous at this point. Give me something I haven't seen yet that isn't just an excuse to push more MTs on us. Why am still going back to games 12-15 years old at this point? because at least those games are fun and don't require constant daily check ins to stay relevant.
I dont think pushsquare really needs to ask what most of us think about live service games or games as a service or whatever they are called. If they actually followed the comments sections every time these business models charading as games are discussed they should really pick up on the general mood that they are pretty much disliked by everybody bar a few..
@MFTWrecks I like your thinking, they are sitting on some of the best catalogs of IPs next to Nintendo and Capcom, and they absolutely do nothing with them because who knows why?.. more then likely they will just turn them all into MT monsters and dilute those IPs into 1 year throwaway titles.
I’d honestly say that the only live service Sony game with a future is MLB The Show. That’s run by people who respect your time and it fits a specific niche.
@NEStalgia The day has come when we 100% agree, crocs must die.
I know a lot of people are looking forward to Factions but if a multiplayer game is gonna take 4 years to get to market then there doing it wrong because these games are following trends and what's the trend now certainly won't be in four years time.Personally I'm really unhappy with Sony going in this direction but I'm obviously not there market anymore which is quite sad especially as I've had a sony console since 1997🤷♂️
I love how the title says "It's all the samey shooters" when they be doing the "samey cinematics experience" and nobody had the guts to say it
Don't be so negative. All 12 live service games will be hits. I will forgo sleep and quit my job and spend 2 hours a day playing each one of them to make sure they don't fail. I will spend all my money on them, which will be limited without an income due to quitting my job, until I die, which won't be long without sleeping and having no money for food.
Me hate GaaS, all of them doa blah blah blah. I want all games to be single player blah blah blah. Sony is changing blah blah blah.
It's getting quite tiresome. Shooters are what sony needs most and so they're trying multiple attempts to please that crowd.
Looking forward to bungie, last of us factions, concord and fairgame because I have yet to see if it shakes the shooter market.
@Northern_munkey the same could be said about Fortnite, yet we all know how popular it is. Internet comments are not indicative of a game's popularity or potential.
@twinspectre90 yes, because Spiderman, God of War, The Last of Us, and Ghost of Tsushima are pretty much the same thing. Clearly, if you've played one, you've played them all
@Americansamurai1
I prefer these games over what irrelevant pixelopus games made and was going to make.
@twinspectre90 The difference is that most of us like the “samey cinematic experiences” and one of those titles likely brought us into the PS fandom.
I personally hope that these games are either far better than we expect of them or that they fail so spectacularly that Sony reevaluated their strategy to the point that they understand that their players want strong single player content instead. Just look at the top selling games the past few years and the games that have failed in that same time frame. That said, Sony desperately needs shooters, so it’s great they’re developing some. The problem though is that they don’t look good, or rather resemble in appearance games that have failed. I’m expecting Bungie’s efforts to be the most profitable and successful by a wide margin.
@WallyWest
Because you have a emotional feeling towards factions.*
@naruball Do you want to see my trophy list? because I can assure you I played God of War 2018,Last of us ps3 and also remastered, I played Spiderman, and I also played Horizon. I'm not the type of guy that talks without actually playing these games.
EDIT: Did you play games like Medievil? because that game is what PlayStation used to be that I'm missing.
@twinspectre90 Which particular games would you say are all "samey"? For example, TLOU, Ratchet & Clank, Ghost of Tsushima and Spider-Man are all very different experiences. I've see this complaint being thrown around a lot on other sites and I just don't see where it comes from. Okay they might all have cinematics but the core gameplay of each game are vastly different from the others.
@somnambulance I can accept a story, what I don't like is when a game is trying to be a movie, why should a medium that is far bigger than Hollywood simulate Hollywood? I don't like the theater immersion, I like world immersion.
I felt in love with PlayStation because wayback they had games for everybody, unlike today where their main target is movie fans.
@GodofCapcom Sure but NaughtyDog also have a fantastic track record off making games and the original Factions was pretty damn good. I agree Sony needs some MP focused games so why not reboot Killzone, give it the focus and budget they give the single player stuff and make it the next big thing?
End of the day Live Services are way past their peak and unless they're F2P new ones don't stand a chance especially shooters when there's endless amounts of them already out.
@Kevw2006 I said "cinematic experiences" and now you're telling me these games aren't cinematic experiences?
@WallyWest They had a fun little arena brawler shooter known as Drawn to Death, people made jokes about it until Sony decided to kill the game, not allowing me and others to play it, now the same group are the ones claiming BS like "game preservation"
@twinspectre90 Read my comment again, I literally said they have cinematics so I'm not sure how you think I'm saying they aren't cinematic. I asked which games you claim are "samey".
Practically any game with any sort of story to it has cinematics these days but for some reason its only Sony first party games that get called out for it.
@GodofCapcom I don't, especially since most of these will be dead within 6 months after release.
@Kevw2006 And I think you should read my comment, because I said "Samey cinematic experiences"
The showcase last night has made me want to reflect on how much I want to commit to gaming going forward. Sony was always the drive that they were the last publisher pushing real games, and now seeing the direction they are going in I just don't know anymore.
This showcase answered my own question I have at times of why I still go back and play my PS3 more than my PS5.
@twinspectre90 I read your original comment just fine. Again, name me two games that are the same?
At some point, maybe in 2026-2027 at the start of PS6 gen, these live service fails will implode and then heads will roll, probably the 2 at the top, even though I have nothing against them, like many have in these comment sections.
I'd say that will be the period when they'll shift back to single player games only.
@Americansamurai1
Wow. I have to ask how do you know that lmao. Would like some it.
@WallyWest
Who cares. Honestly I can't deal this with unjustified negativity. If sony is the best game maker, prove it... or can they only just do single player? Weakling sony.
@GodofCapcom yeah some people here want PlayStation to be a one trick pony, And just only make AAA single player games which getting more expensive to make.
Trying to get a fortnite like hit is a pipe dream. No one else managed it. Often, no one does.
Epic got lucky, just like Blizzard got lucky back in the day.
These are not things you throw dime a dozen to the wall and think one is gonna stick like fortnite. The likelyhood is that none will. A couple might stick a bit.
But, this is a complete misunderstand of the market. Players only play or care for a couple of these games at a time.
So, not only do you have to have a live service that sticks, you need to dethrone the existing ones.
There is also this thing called sunken cost. People are already invested in the games they play. It's a lot of work to start over elsewhere.
Sorry sony, it's just too late. You should bet on the one you have bought. Destiny.
Or... buy a studio that already owns successful ones, such as square enix with FFXIV.
Hope all of them bomb. I hate gaas and want my games as one&done then move on the next one while remembering good memories with the former. Story matters the most to me.
I'll agree that I kind of thought of Hyenas when Fairgame$ was being shown, that and Payday. I did feel a little cynical because so much was made of how Haven was making something really innovative. And I don't know, maybe the game is, but a PvPvE heist shooter doesn't strike me as especially novel or groundbreaking. But it could be! However that teaser didn't really tell us anything unique about the game.
As for Concord, I thought the teaser was interesting because it could be all sorts of things. The revelation that it's a PvP FPS of any sort is a major bummer.
@GodofCapcom look at the other 99% of live service titles that die and at all the servers that was shut down. Only so many can survive. They have 12 live service titles and they be lucky for half to catch on. A small title like from pixelopus would always live because they don't rely on a constant player base..
Sony obviously has a lot of first party titles that aren’t GaaS that are in the works. That this Showcase showed off very little that isn’t multi-platform is confusing and somewhat concerning.
I’ve been been a PlayStation only gamer since forever, but the past few years have seen me acquire a Switch, Xbox and Steam Deck. I loved Nintendo as a child, but felt that their games were something I’d grown out of. Going back to their games now, I see so much quality and innovation, both in single player and multiplayer that doesn’t rely on live service.
As an older gamer, I see less and less that appeals to me from the bigger publishers. I’d actually rather play a Kirby game on the Switch than something like Fairgames, which looks so much like any other game of its type.
Sadly, games are too afraid to deviate from formulas nowadays, mostly due to fear of failure. What cannot be fathomed is how a publisher thinks that attempting to cash in on Splatoon with a game that is highly likely to fail is a good idea. Make something original or don’t bother. No wonder companies like Sony are buying up all the smaller studios, as this is seemingly the only sector where innovation lies.
I don’t see anything in presentations such as this showcase that makes me think “wow, that looks intriguing/original/unique, I want to see more of that”.
@nessisonett And I’d add Gran Turismo. It seems to get the balance right of having enough core content but also live service elements if you just want to play it endless forever with new updates.
@AdamNovice I was wondering if Helldivers 2 was a live service game or not. I thought it looked decent actually but I haven’t heard about it being a GaaS
@Kevw2006 Last of Us and Horizon both share the Post apocalyptic world, both have some kind of Crafting, both are cinematics, I can include Days gone too.
The big question I haven’t seen publications ask is; Even though these GaaS games have been shutting down rather quickly, are they turning a profit? If so, these companies will not care. They may be heading toward the direction of quick output for a quick cash-in. I’m pretty sure Ubisoft said that Hyperscape was a huge success for them even though they shut it down quickly. The success of these games may not be based on how long they live, but if they can turn a quick profit. If so, these companies will continue throwing crap at the wall.
Jim has invested more money in GaaS garbage than traditional games now, and his policies are definitely hurting all the first party single player games that everyone loves. I can't wait to see all these Jim Ryan's GaaS fail miserably and shut down their servers within a year.
@FatalBubbles 😂😂
@twinspectre90 They killed it because it was awful with barely anyone playing it.
@GodofCapcom Ahh i see you're a troll 🙄 Players don't want live services as this year has proved considering how many have died or launched to nothing, the live service ship has long sailed for Sony and they are just wasting money on these dead on arrival games. Bland shooters made by an ex Ubi dev is not exactly exciting.
That's even truer than the fear of live service games. They could be single-player shooters and not get any traction if there isn't something compelling to make me care.
The rest of the points about the live service model are all very valid - it's not necessarily all shooters, it's not easy to break out that big hit, and a lot of new attempts are dying early out of the gate. I'm not sure Sony cares - I think they're gambling there will be ONE hit in those dozen attempts, and that will be enough to make up the losses.
I think they're failing to see the damage they can do to their brand with those failures, though - it's not just losing some money down the hole. They'll also be throwing away goodwill from every player who DOES like the failures and gets the rug pulled out from under them. They'll be throwing away goodwill from the players who try them and hate them. Those failures may not break the balance sheet, but they'll cost more than the numbers show.
Agreed Rocket League and Fornite aren't the same. I mean Rocket League is just Rocket Powered Hyper cars the PS3 eshop game but modernised? So when are the Ghost of Tsushima 2 or Horizon live services I wonder besides Last of Us Factions. I bet they will and it will be sad.
Destruction Allstars is not casual appealing no vehicular combat games is to them it's for core gamers and then they go to all shooters of different types........ When WipEout Rush and Fate GO aren't shooters and their on mobile.... Ok then Sony.
I may be singleplayer interested in any genres/mechanics gamers but I mean I can come up with dumb ideas at least like below:
-why not a roguelike one with randomised/strict dungeon layouts and collectibles?
-Why not a Trials/Joe Danger or Trackmania style game a few set obstacles/track layouts?
-Where is our Mirror's Edge, Titanfall wall running and shooting or Vanquish style slow motion/skidding across the ground, Max Payne slow motion layout games? Easy leaderboards there.
-Where is the runner games why is there no Temple Run, Mario Run (Square's Go titles weren't these but still) or Jetpack Joyride runners as the same sort thing expanded upon.
-Where is our farming or cooking ones with a cycle like many party games would do of minigames just structured differently?
-They could make Smartphone Playlink style party game titles but more live service structured.
Why not a roguelike to see how far people can get. Imagine a dungeon with choices/one path and it's procedural/randomised of gear, level layouts, traps, collectibles and more or strict linear paths even to simplify it and load quicker. Whether limited levels/layouts or so many you can't see the end but it gets harder and harder there came up with one in no time at all developers/publishers take my idea.
Look at Tetris99, Mario35, Pacman99 and more. Some other genres work for the format if you have a small amount of levels like Mario repeated, you have puzzle games/arcade games repeated, you have small segments.
Like sure they have WipEout Rush a management game you barely play when Gran Turismo B-spec or actual manager games are more compelling then it. Or Fate Grand Order but I mean on console we only see the shooter ones or Destruction Allstars being not a good vehicular combat game and a genre that never appealed to casuals anyways did people forget we have cult followings of Blur and Split Second also let alone no Twisted Metal or other games because casuals don't buy them core gamers do. At least Wreckfest is the modern Flatout and carves it's niche well for an audience among eh arcade live services and sim games so broken it's hilarious to watch Raycevick's and others videos at least 3 times for comparisons on each game's broken states, the Behaviour Entertainment racing with sci-fi level design and even Indies.
Anyway back of topic.
Not just the mindset of oh the biggest 3 genres are RPG, Action Adventure and Shooter must be the focus, stick to those so we have only shooter battle royales/multiplayer of other sorts to compete with COD Warzone, The Division or something.
Like Assassin's Creed and other Ubisoft games are live services besides having the long campaigns. They aren't all shooters only certain Tom Clancy ones are and Far Cry but you don't see Mario Rabbids or Splinter Cell's new game. Sure Starlink was what it was of toys to life.
Like Marathon is that in name only it isn't related to Bungie's original Marathon which I think is sad, imagine if Doom 2016/Eternal were a live service people would not be happy especially with the Boomer Shooter period were in right now Marathon returning would have been great but nope it's just an extraction shooter whatever that type of live service multiplayer shooter direction that is.
Who is more excited for Metroid Prime 4 then Concord for logo reveal. Honestly I'm surprised they didn't tell us what some of them were and we had to wait for media to tell us. I'm glad the media are telling us what the games actually are intended to be as you'd have no clue by logo/vague trailers wasting people's time. If it's a well known IP sure but we know nothing about them. It's Starfield's first trailer all over again. At least Bayonetta 3/Metroid Prime 4 we know what they are usually.
@Heavy_Artilery Agreed but you can only simplify a game so far too before it's nothing right? At least they have WipEout Rush a manager game and Fate GO on mobile right????? Yeah the console use of live services seems pretty repetive.
I mean there is only so much 'real rules for the average person because gamer terms and too many systems is too much for their minds the same as watching a visual gags tv shows like Police Squad don't work but a talking focused one does' of farming, simulation of jobs and other things with or without even killing or survival games to even be 'safe' for people to play and 'easy to understand'.
I mean Tycoon/City builders and farming games have their appeal of course just like strategy games and party games do.
I mean even some party games go from ah a few rules to pages and pages for games so simple.
I mean Mario35, Tetris99 and Pacman99 exist
-why not a roguelike one with randomised/strict dungeon layouts and collectibles?
-Why not a Trials/Joe Danger or Trackmania style game a few set obstacles/track layouts?
-Where is our Titanfall wall running and shooting or Vanquish style tutorial level layout games?
-Where is the runner games why is there no Temple Run or Jetpack Joyride runners as the same sort thing.
-Where is our farming or cooking ones with a cycle like many party games would do of minigames just structured differently?
-They could make Smartphone Playlink style party game titles but more live service structured.
It's so easy for us to come up with ideas but they keep making shooters.
All free ideas for them clearly right there and it took me no time at all.
Either way trends are what they are but I enjoyed racing/shooters trends of the sixth/seventh gen when they actually had good ideas of stories, abilities, heavy feeling, floaty feeling, silly, dark and gritty, Blur as a mature kart racers with real cars, and still innovated on the cores of different ones no R Racing Evolution, Evolution GT with RPG mechanics, Racing Lagoon Square's own racing RPG visual novel kind of game (before there bad PS2 launch title one) or Gran Turismo was the same and improved others.
Many of those ideas aren't even in modern games of the genre especially the racing space where is my car builder of Sega GT/Apex/Supercar Street Challenge, my RPG systems of Alfa Romeo Racing Italiano/Evolution GT or my Driver San Francisco swap feature, where is my Battlefield 2 Modern Combat swap feature in a modern shooter today no where that's where but of course the other genres of the eras were good too. Even Space Station Silicon Valley, Donkey Kong 64, 40 Winks and more did character abilities/switching completely differently in the N64/PS1 era all between a character barrel to defeating characters on the food chain to just costumes in a jack in the box around levels.
I mean we see tons of xp bars and this and that systems done to death then anything actually new sometimes how much depth and simplicity is there for casuals you think these days?
@WallyWest
We haven't seen the games.
@TrickyDicky99 It's already happening: the fine print during the Helldivers 2 trailer says "PS Plus membership required for online multiplayer", though it's not clear if that also means for PC but I very much doubt it if they have any hope of actually selling the game there.
I've always maintained that Sony should either drop the paywall when cross-play is involved or charge PC players to access PSN players while still allowing them to play with other PC players for free. Those are the only equitable solutions.
@WallyWest Or the reality is "People were terrible at arena shooters" because in this day and age we blame the game instead of admitting we are bad at something.
They expected to be great because they played Call of Duty, so they thought they would dominate in the Arena genres, and reality hit them hard and they realize they are not that great with Arena shooters, so they decided the easy route and blame the game.
@PC_Peasant I see this more as a Karma to the ones that wanted cinematic experiences, how does it feel?
I wanted PlayStation to be like PS1 and PS2 era, but they decided to focus on gamers like you that want cinematic, and now you have become the new "I want PlayStation to be like...." and they are focused on another group of gamers. How does it feel?? Karma.
Holy dumpster fire! Heading to purexbox and buying an X tomorrow instead of hanging out with this group of dopes!
(not you people but the developers suits behind Sony. What a disastrous generation they've produced! Good luck yeh big dopes!)
Sony has plenty of titles that could make excellent transitions into live services if Sony wanted it.
Hot Shots Golf would make an exceptional live service game.
Mihoyo has shown that a game like Dark Cloud could be super relaxing and super profitable with a live service spinoff.
Rhythm games need live service models to succeed.
But when they're all shooters they're all going to cannibalize each other until everyone goes back to playing Fortnite.
It'll never work period for me, since I avoid all live-service games.
@twinspectre90 Or you need to understand a game you happened to like wasn't actually that well received elsewhere. The playercount was low and most didn't like it so it was naturally dropped.
@GodofCapcom But we did get a cringe trailer and details after that sound bad. Fun fact about trailers is that they're meant to sell audiences on it and make you want it so if that fails then Sony has done a bad job, why should i care about something that looks like a reject from the 2018 live service playbook?
@naruball i did say most not all and yes there are the exceptions but most commentors on this site dont really like the whole business model. I'm indifferent to them myself and if i enjoy a game then i'll play it no matter but that dosnt mean i dont understand why people dislike them. Pushsquare should be able to read the room by now without having to keep asking what we all think of them.
I though sony has good & unique idea about live service games, like say, twisted metal gass game, or maybe warhawk/starhawk like game, or maybe New Home, like the ps3 game but with the power and speed of ps5.
But all we get is another shooter live service games 😒
Marathon could be sucessful but the rest will be forgoten.
At the risk of sounding too political, as income inequality continues to grow in nearly every developed country in the world, it will become harder to nickel and dime consumers successfully. So, I think we are heading for a fallout for these live service type games, if we aren't there already.
There aren't enough high spending players for all these games to be successful long-term. As others have pointed out, we are seeing many games which focus on online multiplayer have support dropped in a few years or less, which is absurd.
It's not even that I'm opposed to these types of games, I just realistically don't see a market that can support many co-existing. The only way I can see the majority of these games being successful is if they're more traditional single-player games, with an added multiplayer component, or a live-service type model that adds events or content regularly.
@Cashews
Sadly, enough, the Xbox ship isn’t doing too great either.
Both Microsoft and Sony are kind of flopping around right now.
most service games are intended to be disposable affairs. there is no meaning, heart or artful purpose behind them other than to fool people into playing them (during a fad period) while they empy their bank accounts. those types of games will dillute the good work coming out of sony's other studios and hurt the brand in the long run.
@PenguinLtd well put totally agree with you
Playstaion dont forget your core audience and what got you to where you are now.
this chasing on GAS is one of sonys biggest mistakes ever
It's not going to work with me, anyway. I'm not up for "live services".
I want story and gameplay driven single player experiences. I don't want Sony's hand in my pocket with microtransactions, battle passes and digital currency.
I think the industry reached peak monetisation with season passes. Everything that's come afterwards has been egregious.
Cry as much you want for diversity and that Sony lost it's touch but you really forget that companies just follow the money. Yeah, we gamers vote with our wallets. Did concrete genie sold well? Dreams? Astrobot? No gamers keep buying broken games, cosmetics,loot boxes and surprise mechanics!
I presumably missed that sony revealed everything about these live service games that is there to be revealed. I rather had the impression that nothing has been revealed at all, other than that shooting will be involved. I don't think it is clear what game mechanics will be there, how the game-loop will play out.
So, while I agree nothing about these games look inspiring, I also do not see anything to criticize since nothing of substance was revealed. We only know that guns are likely to be used in both games. But does this make these games automatically bad and bland ?
All I read here is: "live service games are generally bad, nobody wants them, they all fail and are all the same". Despite that in the end all that people play are gta online, warzone and wow. Are those games the unreachable pinnacle of gaming? Is there no point in trying to compete because everything else will be just bland and boring?
So, what about waiting until more is revealed about these games before arguing them into the ground ? Maybe there will be indeed interesting, fresh ideas, maybe not and they all will be just bad copies of existing games. I don't think that anybody here knows.
@WallyWest No, no, it was because player sucked. I bet if the game was dumbed down to please them, the game was still around.
get2SammyB wrote:
Fixed it for ya
@Kevw2006 I know this doesn’t mean the games are the same (and I am sort of saying this in jest but also… sort of not) but whenever I play a Playstation Studios game and you have to climb up some sort of mountain side with little hand holders and the slightly different coloured blocks/rocks/beams that show where you go next… I roll my eyes. Not sure why anyone thinks that is fun, especially not copy pasted in every PS game. Sure this is reductive but literally put “(insert Playstation game name) climbing” into google…
… it’s the same picture.
I've never tried Fortnite, but I have tried Apex Legends. My attempt to play the game was sufficient to inform me that I suck at the Battle Royale type of game. I have played a fair bit of Destiny and Destiny 2, but I don't to the multiplayer aspects, so I guess you would say that I effectively play it as a single-player experience.
I just don't enjoy PVP. I'll be 60 later this year, and my reflexes just aren't up to the required level. To be clear, I have beaten every Souls-Like game I have played, and I tend to play single-player games on the hardest difficulties, but there is something inherently different about playing against actual human beings, and that it where my limitations are well highlighted.
Therefore, whilst I don't wish these new games to go down in flames, I just know that they're unlikely to be for me, which is a shame...
@Americansamurai1 yup Hermen Hulst definitely needs to be scrutinised more. Deviation was his pick, turned out to be a failure. It's very early but given the horrible teaser and reaction to it Haven doesn't seem to be a great pick either. Whether the 3.6bn for Bungie was justified remains to be seen but I'm doubtful.
I don't really mind a couple of live service games if it doesn't go at the expense of good single player experiences.
What I do mind is what was shown to us on Wednesday. It should be pretty obvious that PS fans want something like SOCOM, Resistance or Killzone when it comes to FPS. In other words, games with either a realistic/grounded or gritty setting. Yet what we're getting is a futuristic/sci-fi theme mixed with a colourful/cartoony Overwatch-inspired aesthetic topped up with some cringe anti-capitalist dialogue. I feel like I've seen this type of game ten times already and I didn't like it even the first time
@gaston I think it's pretty much that people have settled down into their live service games of choice and so they're less likely to delve into a new live service game because there's not enough time to do both so they'd rather stick with what they've spent lots of time and money on for years.
Meanwhile you've also got a load of people who are fed up of the existence of live service because stuff like loot boxes, battle passes and microtransaction stores have ruined franchises they knew and loved in the past.
So the long running big live service games stay big (e.g. Fortnite, GTA Online, CoD, FFXIV) but outside that collection of games, the live service model collapses.
I feel Sony's best approach would be to give something like SOCOM, Resistance or Killzone the Splatoon treatment. Good single player campaign, multiplayer is supported for awhile with free content updates, single player gets a paid DLC story expansion but biggest of all is the game has absolutely no microtransactions (and hence isn't live service).
@Grumblevolcano personally I am not very interested in multiplayer, live service games. I just find it weird that games are already considered to be bland and boring just because they are live service games, without knowing anything about them. There are few examples in which the live service model worked out. In that sense it is more probable that a new live service game will fail then the opposite. But, still to judge a project one should at least wait until there is some information about it.
Not sure whether a single player game with a tacked on multiplayer has a better chance to create a long-term engagement than a game build up from the ground for this model. Also whether a game is based of a known IP or not is no guarantee for success, I would say.
By the time most of these release it will be even more so too late and to little with the lame trend chasing. Its pretty much a guarantee that most of these will fail that are all trying the same thing.
It is Playstation players that will suffer with meager content in the meantime while Sony learns their lesson in trying to side bust into a party nearly a decade too late.
It's a completely idiotic move to do so now armed with the knowledge that most have already failed in recent years and the new ones that have announced in place of the quality projects that usually come from given developers and platforms have received massive nearly unanimous backlash. To continue on seeing this unfolding in the gaming space is just moronic, but par for the course for Sony and its tone deaf mgmt and strategies as of late.
The uproar on their live service focus needs to be louder and the excuse making, marketing, and willful ignorance for them needs to stop. How many more lame fps sci fi pvp extraction shooters, or fortnite looking heist garbage do we need to see before it becomes clear these are likely predominantly uninspired trend chasing retreads. Certain ips and formulas COULD work, like twisted metal or socom. Yet the latter would require real investment and work, and I dont think thats what Sony is looking for. They wanted the highest possible return with as little investment or creativity as possible and doing so by just throwing resources at these lame titles and hoping one sticks at the expense of engaging games while Sony rolls the dice this generation.
Which is what it is, but the bigger question: is Sony is also going to push their big studios to implement live service elements into the major ageing iterative IPs as well?
Make them all less samey shooters and I will be OK with that. I main traditional games, but every now and again I play shooters so I can see myself getting into quality GAAS shooters.
Each to their own but I'll not play a single one of then. I'd rather have my cash fleeced from someone/something less generic
@OrtadragoonX Yar. Both desperately lost this gen. Now it is a game of cat and mouse to see if Nintendo outplays them in the next year or so.
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...