Topic: Next Playstation Showcase/SOP

Sony was completely absent from Gamescom Opening Night Live which increases the chance of a showcase.

@Yousef-
'High end'... For £1000, not a chance.
You'd be talking more like £2K at least

@Shwing you’re pinging the wrong person. I’m not looking for a pc to buy, Sol is.

Edit: my bad. I misread your message. You’re right, 2000 is about right.

Grubb's given his initial remarks, maintaining it's a SOP and not a showcase. I definitely think he's right there will be something, but he did say last time in the summer he was leaning towards a showcase and it ended up being a SOP. Might be wrong about this one too?

I'm generally pretty positive about just waiting for reveals and letting folks show what they have when they're ready, but if it's a state of play... what is going on? Sony knows fans have been aware of PS5 Pro for many months, and are expecting something to accompany its announcement that can keep them interested. They also know we're less excited about these presentations against the major showcases. I don't want to leap into any conclusions, other than I don't think I have any clue what's going on anymore XD

Not to mention Xbox had a killer show that's still left a mark and Nintendo seems to be ramping up their impending Switch Successor announcement (after also having a strong show of their own in the summer). Ah Sony, why you do dis.

I'm gonna bump this thread as AstroBot is out on Friday, and Sony often likes to announce on a Tues/Weds that they have a show on a Thursday. So, just incase 😅

It'd be cool if they did one last bit of hype for the good wee bot, and then slapped a tease for something, anything on to the end of it.

@Ravix it’s probably too late for them to announce anything this week, I suspect it will be in another 2 weeks to give Astrobot his time in the sun.

I just saw the news about Concord, maybe they’ll start the next show with an apology 😂

Wasn’t sure where to put these thoughts, since our ‘Armchair CEO’ thread has locked, but I was wondering what reasonable people (as opposed to the overreactors and trolls on the internet at large) feel should be (or should have been) the strategic plan for Sony regarding the current state of things.

On one hand, Sony’s bulletproof position in the console sector seems to have suffered from a substantial flaw in its armor with the total dumpster fire named ‘Concord.’ Analysis of how a production company can be so wrong about a game is perplexing.

Something I’ve read and tend to agree with is that Concord could have been better received if there was a little more comfort from the core PlayStation audience about the other first party studios projects. There’s a narrative out there that Sony is only focusing on GaaS at the expense of its traditional strength — the narrative single player games. I think we all know that there’s probably a half dozen quality SP games in the oven, but the lack of any disclosure about many of the marquee PS studios’ projects is giving an impression that the only thing Sony have been working on are Comcord, Fairgames, Helldivers 2. We finally heard about Horizon LEGO and Astrobot, but it was fairly late and the court of public opinion had convicted Concord to the death penalty weeks before its launch.

So consider this — if Sony had teased a little information about Uncharted: Inheritance (or whatever it will be called) and/or Ghost of Okinawa (again, name unknown) and/or Bloodborne: The Hunter’s Nightmare Edition (also, ?), and then it also had “oh, by the way, there’s this little side project of a Sci-fi online FPS also coming out” then perhaps the general attitude toward Concord would have been less vitriolic and more of a “ok, maybe I’ll check this out to tide me over while I wait for Wolverine in 6 months and Sucker Punch’s Ghost game in 9 months.” Ironically, I think Astro Bot is set to benefit greatly from Concord’s failure, for these reasons.

Also, I wonder if having PC concurrent launch hurt Concord and perhaps it would have marketed better as a PS5 exclusive with PC launch to follow a few weeks or months later. I think the idea was get PC players involved from the start to get the player base maxed out for an online only game like this, but it definitely backfired when everyone saw the abysmal Steam numbers. The transparency of Steam stats probably drove many console players to avoid the game entirely. Just a guess. I’m not sure what the right answer there is, because positive buzz from Steam numbers definitely helped Helldivers 2, but it had a negative effect on Concord.

Also, the fact that Firewalk clearly had a kind of narrative emphasis on the game with little animated shorts and an obvious attempt at a storyline, makes me also wonder if you could have sold a lot more copies if you just packed in a 6 hour solo campaign. They could have easily kept some sales going even after shutting down servers if they had something like that. Again, I’m not sure if it would have made a huge difference but perhaps in conjunction with these other launch ideas then it could have at least made a little money back and sold more than 25,000 copies.

Also, there’s a fine line between holding back information on a game and releasing it early for beta testing and creating some buzz. Beta testing are glorified demos at this point and server stress tests, but I think earlier public access for new IP games will help either create hype if it’s good, or alert the team to problems if it’s bad. It didn’t help Suicide Squad when they went back after the poor reception and delayed the game tried to salvage it, but I think in retrospect earlier public access for Concord could have made a difference.

Overall, the length of development is another major issue at play. I’ve said it before, but when Concord started development, the Guardians of the Galaxy live service shooter idea was probably a good one. But 6 years later, not so much. Capturing a zeitgeisty idea requires that you get it out while it’s still trending. I think this is also why Star Wars Outlaws release and critical reception has been slightly muted. Timing is everything.

Haven and Fairgames is sure to benefit from Concord’s mistakes. It absolutely can’t have a worse outcome than Concord. And hopefully by the time it’s released, we’ll be safe in the knowledge that it is merely one supplemental game to augment a treasure trove of other content coming soon from PlayStation studios.

(Apologies for the long diatribe, but I had to get some of these thoughts out)

@Th3solution I honestly don't think Concord failed because people hated on it, though. It just wasn't aimed at anyone at all. I do agree at the time it probably seemed a good idea, but if you analyse what they were trying to do, it looks more and more like they were trying to get people who play games with stories and characters to play trashy live service blergh to "tap into" a new market that combines all gamers, in a greed fueled vision of pure unadulterated success. I would bet the phrase "tap into" was used many, many, many times during board meetings.

But the problem is that the people who play free to play live service hero shooters do so for free already, and they don't give a monkeys about any content other than load in, do fun stuff, buy silly things with no impulse control, repeat. They are, in large a different type of gamer than the ones that will play story based, combat based, single player games. And pretty much no one who likes a good story or set of characters in a game is foaming at the mouth to play a game without a solo campaign, or any real reason behind playing it.

The main concern is that it was clear for a very long time that there was no market for this game, there was no recognition at all that maybe the concept that sounded good in a business meeting was actually flawed beyond all belief.

You can't just slap a story on a death match in CoD, for example, people just want to go and play the death match to shoot people. And if you did slap a story on it, it wouldn't make people who play single player games randomly decide to go and watch a bit of story unfold before playing some repetitive online pvp that they don't want to play in the first place.

"It's a fusion, guys. We are going to tap into two massive markets. Convince people who like live service to crave more stories and get them to buy single player games, and convince those who like single player games that more live service is what they need in their lives"

If Skull and Bones was a pirate RPG with a story taking you from rags to riches, in a world filled with characters that matter, and coherent progression towards an explosive finale, I'd have bought it. If Concord was a new IP similar to GotG but with progression from act 1 to 3 with expansive worlds and bases to explore, and gameplay that matches a game with a storyline, I'd have maybe been interested, especially if it was SIE backed.

But, they weren't. And so as it is, they are super f***ing niche, regardless of what "bigdogg69" says on the internet and thus Concord flopped just as hard as it should have.

@Th3solution as for all the other SoP, CEO, road map things. My view is that, as a pretty grounded person (who admittedly likes to sometimes post exaggerated views for my own entertainment, especially if they will annoy people with their own extreme views on subjects, tee hee)

And as a long time Sony customer, fan, or whatever 'An Appreciator of the content they have delivered me consistently over many years, and thus earned my continued support'? I have eluded to a few times that even I am getting a little frustrated with the lack of information on the future games that are coming. I obviously have no interest in live service, and I do think there are reasons not to show too much, too early; Capcom and Pragmata as example 1a, where they basically showed a video that made it look like they had a game coming out fairly soon, and then had to say, well actually we've barely started and since then it is proving incredibly difficult to make, and so it went for years and years. Same with Beyond Good and Evil 2. Showing a concept video that looks like a game cutscene that is ready to go, and then not being able to make the actual game, well that is just bad.

But despite all that, it feels like we are due something, even if it is just teases along with the PS5 Pro, just to say, it's okay, we're on track and the Sony you know is back big time in 2025 and beyond. Because if we don't get that, maybe more and more people will say "f*** it" and get gaming PC's.

Which also ties into another point. Largely disappointing resolutions and textures lately. Games just don't seem seem to be as premium as they were, comparatively. And I'm not sure the PS5 and Series X have delivered what they set out to. And also, the series S can throw itself off a cliff, as far as I'm concerned 😛

@Th3solution it’s a difficult problem, and I don’t envy how Sony is planning to move ahead with the rest of the gen and then the inevitable transition to PS6. They’ve a lot to figure out as we’ve seen with the Ryan/Hulst gaas push.

Let me start a bit negative and then spin it back to what I think is the objective reality of the state of play (buh dum tsh 🥁)

People didn’t want Concord, and they don’t want Fairgames. It doesn’t matter what rumblings happen internally, like Hulst talking about how impressed he is with whatever title is being developed, they don’t speak to our desires for a multiplayer game and seem to (as with Concord) do nothing original which forces my hand to invest my time in it. It’s another game… not Portal, TF2, Splatoon, just some other game, with Helldivers being an exception.

What frustrates many of us is that you (Sony) took so many resources to invest in something that your fans were not asking for. Concord flopped and now we’re worried about Marathon and Jade Raymond’s new game. AND this is on top of an executive recently complaining about Sony’s lack of IP. The nerve. We could go on endlessly about strange quotes and decisions within SIE, but recent events have shown it’s gotten to the point of them being tone-deaf. Fans don’t matter the way they used to because the profit motive aligned with a gaas payoff transcends the need to communicate with or deliver something to the fanbase that meets their criteria for great games. Executives know better than people who play games what a great game is. Capitalism is fun!

But back to today in an overall sense. PlayStation is doing really well in sales. The brand is growing even with a poor cadence of first party releases, expanding into other territories through hero projects and massive successes like Wukong. Not to mention GTA6 will move many PS5s upon release.

Further, and more optimistic, the gen isn’t over. People online seem to forget that it’s …checks calendar… 2024. There’s still 2-3 years left in the gen at least, and we know a boatload of internal studios have been working on new titles, some of them brand new ips. The gen is not “the worst gen ever” because it’s not done yet. We could receive more masterpieces within the next 3 years than we know what to do with from PS studios. Astro says hi, btw.

Overall, fans are jaded because they don’t feel spoken to anymore. Nintendo for example is very strong at maintaining various IPs relevant in their portfolio, whether in the form of ports, remakes, or new games. They actually seem to know how to excite and build a connection with their fans. Not perfect of course, and I think a lot of Nintendo games are overrated, but phenomenal in their ability to preserve many of their IPs through new legacy titles (bad at old titles though) like the upcoming Brothership.

On that note, it comes down to two things for me:

1) communication with the fan base, those who’ve helped keep you afloat
2) proper care with the mountain of IPs you carry. Be creative, thoughtful, and figure it out. Nintendo has done it and so can you.

And that, to me, indicates a great show from Sony could start renewing their legendary past into a brighter future from a bitter present.

That is all.

Couple of points. I think releasing the PC version at same time would've had an impact if not for the simple reason that concurrent players can be tracked and logged easily on PC, and if a game gets off to a slow start, the numbers are there to see, and once that happens people tend to stay away or adopt a wait and see approach. Of course you can't see the PS numbers, thus giving the game a fighting chance to correct course and increase user base.
I also agree with the 2 way communication part... If PS owners had been told what was coming up down the road, then I think people would be more content with the here and now. As things stand no one knows what's in development thus creating less settled users.

@Th3solution I think the Concord situation is that the live service bubble has popped. General trend is that people interested in live service check out live service games if FTP and then go back to whatever live service game they've been playing for several years. In addition, I think Marvel Rivals being announced in the same event as the gameplay debut hurt Concord further.

I think the next Playstation event should avoid PS Studios live service games at all cost. There's so much positivity surrounding Astro Bot at the moment, you wouldn't want something like a Fairgame$ reveal souring the mood.

@Ravix @Shwing @Grumblevolcano @Enriesto These are some excellent thoughts, which I largely agree with.

Just saw the Astro Bot review and it looks like Sony are back in business! We got that nasty Concord taste out of our mouths quickly! It make you wonder if Sony knew they had a ringer with Astro and saved it for this very time so it could be ‘damage control’ for a live service flop. If so, expect Fairgames to be quickly followed by Wolverine. 😄

@Th3solution "I’m not sure what the right answer there is, because positive buzz from Steam numbers definitely helped Helldivers 2, but it had a negative effect on Concord."

There's your answer. Simultaneous PC launches will help good games and hurt bad ones.

Concord was disliked pretty much from the moment of reveal. It was ill-conceived all-around. Even had it been PS5 exclusive, it would never have made a profit.

I do find the idea interesting that the transparency of Steam stats made it impossible for the media to gaslight the public about Concord's chances, though.

@Ralizah “Simultaneous PC launches will help good games and hurt bad ones… I do find the idea interesting that the transparency of Steam stats made it impossible for the media to gaslight the public about Concord's chances”

That’s quite true. And the more open libertarian approach of PC does benefit the player. From the perspective of the producer and developer, the free market unrestricted method of the PC side of things runs these high scale risks that I would think companies could strategize better to control the public narrative. I’m not a market analysis or a business guru, but surely someone over there knew the way the wind was blowing and the masses on PC were just not going to show up. A more tactical release could have been choreographed to control the negativity until the team could correct some issues with the game.

But in the case of this game (and Suicide Squad before it, and Babylon’s Fall, Knockout City, Foamstars, Dreams, etc, etc,) perhaps there was nothing to fix because it was flawed from the very beginning concept. Although, like I mentioned if this same game came out in 2020 it could have had a very different reception, prior to the live service and Marvel fatigue had fully set in.

The temptation remains due to the likes of FF14, Sea of Thieves, Halo Infinite, Warframe, and Destiny 2 which were able to turn things around before the server death knell claimed them and it’s interesting to analyze why reworking a game’s concepts sometimes works and sometimes doesn’t. I would have liked to be in the boardroom when they suits decided to pull the plug after 11 days on Concord, shut down Twisted Metal and Factions 2 before they even saw the light of day, and yet supported other projects like Concord, Dreams, and Foamstars. Surely Fairgames is under the microscope.

Another fascinating aspect of this will be the pendulum effect of Astro Bot being a huge hit. The jury is still out on what financial success it might bring, but there’s a mass of fans who are going to buy it just to ‘send a message’ to Sony to contrast with Concord. I’m estimating great success in n a similar manner to how Ghost of Tsushima benefitted from The Last of Us 2’s controversial reception and I think a lot of players bought and supported GoT just to spite Sony because they wanted TLoU2 to seem a failure by comparison.

Sorry for more rambling thoughts… 😅

@Th3solution the thing is, the game would have sold okay, even after the silly trailer, if it was a game like GotG, or an actual heist thriller in space, like it kind of seemed like it would be when they showed the trailer. I mean, I'd play a heist thriller in space (oh, wait, I am doing haha) But as soon as it is shown to actually be a hero shooter, womp womp. I can't see how the two would ever combine, what is the point in characters and a backstory if the gameplay is JUST shooting some other people that bought the game too 😅 it's like a tacked on game mode without the full game alongside it. And that is what is annoying about live service, most of it fails because it is all just an empty, repetitive game mode that only works if you happen to strike it lucky and get people addicted. The odd one will have some kind of charm that lures young adults, teens and kids alike to it, and the odd one will be realistic and violent enough for adults who like guns and war, i.e CoD. And then there's the kind of CoD military type thing, but with 80's movie space satire, Helldivers.

That is what is so baffling to me about the whole thing. Who were the cutscenes ever for? Why not make a game where you can do some of the things the characters talk about. Or at least have some kind of single player or co-op mission structure. And then if people like the characters they can release the hero shooter part of it later, when there's an actual demand for using those characters in some copy paste game mode 😅

There was never, ever any demand for this game, and steam or no steam, no one pre ordered the damn thing anyway, so they would still be in the same position. I like how some suggested they sent the game to die, too 😅 the amount of Concord ads I saw on YouTube was actually insane. They were fighting hard to get the twitch and YT crowd interested. They thought it would work up until the very last 🥲

@Ravix I completely agree with you. That’s the weird thing is that the game kind of wants to be a story and character driven property, but the mechanics want to he a ‘drop-in, drop-out, shoot other players’ type of thing. They produced long cutscenes and animated shorts trying to stir interest in these characters and their plight. But then, to what end? The game is completely unplayable in a single player space where one could enjoy the story and journey.

And I’m simply not the target audience for the game, admittedly, and none of us have played the game, so we’re speaking blind and speculative. But I heard that the game played pretty decently and was a perfectly passable shooter, as opposed to something like The First Descendant which I’ve heard described as really clumsy from a gameplay perspective and yet seems to have garnered a following.

And I agree with you and Ralizah that the game doesn’t seem like it would have ever been profitable, no matter the approach because it feels creatively bankrupt from conception, but perhaps - Develop a single player campaign on PS5, grow an interest in the property, tack on the live service PVP modes, then roll it out to the PC masses. And with that approach I would estimate that you’d sell more copies and only lose $150 million rather and $200 million. 😂

@Th3solution With successful latter day live service launches, I feel like there's always something there that's interesting, right? Like, Sea of Thieves, FFXIV, etc. offer unique experiences you can't really get elsewhere on the market. Destiny 2 was an established name from an early titan of the model. There's a USP that appeals to people.

I guess the USP of Concord was that you... got Marvel-styled lore cutscenes every now and then? That seems like a really bad way to sell an Overwatch clone, though. You want something that'll permeate the experience.

And wanting to learn more about characters is contingent on liking them. Outside of people who defended it out of fanboyism or because it aligned with their camp in the online culture war, I've not really seen much of any enthusiasm for these characters.

This is the danger of trend-chasing. Gold rushes only make sense if you're able to get in and out quickly. You don't spend eight years developing a project around them. Marvel fatigue was harder to predict, especially given Disney's decade-long dominion over popular culture, but Marvel-related stuff that people actually want and is good still does well (the Spider-Man games sold well, for example, even if SM2 maybe didn't sell as many copies as Sony wanted given the astronomical budget that went into making it).