Sony Aiming for At Least Two Big PS5 Exclusives Each Year Across 'Every Major Genre'

Im afraid that is 60% of PlayStation games that I won’t be playing then. I far prefer single player games over anything else.

60% being live service is not what I want to hear. Theoretically they could only have one single player a game per year which would be extremely disappointing.

This is what i do like about Sony, they know how to run the business and what makes sense for gamers and making money. MS on the other hand just cruise on being rich, granted they seem to have a better idea as to what they need to keep GP successful. But i enjoy Sony’s commitment and strategy, now if only i liked Sony’s UI and controller this would be a slam dunk. Excited for the show tomorrow and while i know many on here will want single player games only. That is just not financially possible. Sony has to have some live service games and online multiplayer to balance out the cost to profit ratios.

So... 60% of the output will be wasted. Got it.
Thankfully there are third parties.

Hopefully there will be consequences when these live services fail for those at the top that made these decisions. Don't blame the developers for your mistakes.

I'm not worried about the 60% number. They're trying to strike gold and create something successful and long lasting like Fortnite (not specifically that genre). I'd expect that investment number to be scaled back if several of those 12 games don't take off.

@AdamNovice Exactly If Sony make a live service X-men game that can be played both coop and solo, that’s on the level of Spider man we all buying it.

Not excited about the live service comment, but Sony increasing its genre diversity with big exclusives is welcome news. It's a very Nintendo-esque strategy, and would be a big change from Sony piling all of their eggs in the third-person action-adventure basket.

@AdamNovice I am, can you give an example of a current single player game that fits the live service model? I don’t think I’ve played any but perhaps I’m wrong.

@FatalBubbles While it's ended now, Assassin's Creed Valhalla was live service/Game as a Service.

Don't worry Sony you lost 60% on me and with more addons it's even easier to skip the blockbusters day one you can get them cheaper and or with everything on a discount price.

@AdamNovice Sony will become the new Ubisoft. 🤣

@LiamCroft What was live service about it? I can’t recall.

@AdamNovice I will gladly be wrong if these live service games are single player experiences but I think they’re chasing the market and money which will lead towards multiplayer.

In five years we'll get about 10 releases and 6 of those will be life service games and only 4 are single player. This give us less than one single player game per year and it is very bad news for me.

Let's be real. Most of yall weren't buying their games anyway unless it had a complete single player campaign. Live service may be a four letter word, but it doesn't have to be a bad thing.

Splatoon is a live service game. Mario Kart is borderline live service. Ark is live service - ish. Mortal Kombat is borderline live service.

All of these are quality games. (Ark is arguable, but definitely has its appeal)

@Blackmagehobbit 2 per genre per year. Not 2 total per year.

@AdamNovice I see what you’re getting at but I have very little interest in MP games. If they are leaning t hat direction, that means less of the games that I have PS for.

Would love to see a new arcade racer from Sony. Maybe a new motorstorm

Give me a turn based rpg and we'll be fine 🙂

60% of their model is live service games? Then I'll lower my expectations for tomorrow's show by 60%... and it was already pretty low.

All these people divorcing "live service" from "multiplayer" as if multiplayer is the problem. What I'm hearing is, best case scenario, we get a fantastic, polished game that doesn't respect your time or money.

Although 12 live service games sounds excessive they are classing GT7 and MLB as 2 of them, also we know factions 2 will be aswell and firewalk, haven, bungie games will also be live service. On top of that it sounds like some of thoses may even be mobile games, remember Sony acquired mobile studio recently. Also firewall 2 on PSVR is more than likely aswell.

If it's done like ghosts legends (I know wasn't live service I just mean was done as add-on to the main game) or this rumoured horizon online game aswell I mean you are still getting single player experiences aswell.

On a side note did I hear bungie want 3 games out by 2026 or did I miss hear that? Guessing one is continuing support for destiny.

I would love to see Sony make FPS shooters and RPGs again.

@LiamCroft

Previous years during the PS5 generation have proven it can; last year saw Horizon Forbidden West, The Last of Us: Part I, and God of War Ragnarok all hit. Before that in 2021 was Returnal and Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart.

They also had Grand Turismo 7 in 2022 upping the count to 4.
2021 also had Ghost of Tsushima Directors cut and Death Stranding Directors cut bumping the count to 4.

As little a fan I am of these PS5 “remasters”, they really are a smart move on Sonys part as they add titles to the list of platform exclusives and diversify their yearly calendar release. It also works wonders for Nintendo. I didn’t add it to my prediction list but I expect at least one remaste reveal during the showcase. Doubt it’s Bloodourne, but if it’s not that they have a long list of titles they could have ready for a quick late year release. I would kill for a Infamous Second Son remaster with some additional content tossed in.

Another thing that I would not be shocked by would be a sequel to Sackboy.

Anyways, yea I have little doubt Sony will have any hard time delivering on this.

@BeerIsAwesome last time I checked, GT7 is definitely a live service game, it even requires a persistent internet connection.

It's 60% of revenue from live service and 40% revenue from one and done games people!
That means going forward 60% of RECURRING revenue will be from live service games while the remaining 40% will come from 3rd party licenses sales from DLC, and first party one and done games.

Oh my goodness folks get It together jeesh lol.

@AdamNovice

I can understand that but I doubt Sony are going to do less single player games since they bought studios and expanded there current ones to accommodate these games alongside their bread and butter ones

To be fair to those scared of the SP output: Naughty Dog, a studio traditionally focused on SP games, is one of the studios heavily focused on one such service game.

@Nem

Hopefully there will be consequences when these live services fail for those at the top that made these decisions. Don't blame the developers for your mistakes.

I’m sure Sony expects most of these service games to not succeed or even survive multiple years. The goal is to do a shotgun approach, throw all ideas they can at the wall, because if a single one of them becomes a Fortnight level success, they will have their future success guaranteed.

The question: why 60% live service?

The answer: because money

@NotoriousWhiz why are you twisting what they said man it doesn’t say 2 games per genre at all lmfaoo wtf

@Darylb88 to be fair money = gamer's habits. Gamer's habits = money. And that has been the story since forever.

And the reason Sony back great single player games is? Oh yes, money also 🤑

Sheesh, I figured it shouldn’t be at least three bare minimum.

Hey, you guys remember a few years back when they said live service wouldn’t effect their singleplayer output? Then, many people said these live service games will only lead to more singleplayer games……. That was all stupid as hell. Who wants to own up to it?

@opo02 My bad. I guess I read it wrong.

That fact that in a couple of years 60% of all PlayStation resources will be used for live service games is EXTREMELY concerning, and I’ve been saying it since they day they announced they had dozens of GaaS in development, they’re using a ton of resources into making those games instead of the single-player experiences that they’re praised for, and now we’ve gone from 4 big games per year to just 2.

And yes, we’ll still be getting some of those single-player games but with so much money going to seek out a live service cash cow there’s inevitably going to be less single-player developments, and even worse, if they have just one big hit it with a live service game I don’t doubt for a second that they’ll steer all current developments into that direction.

Forget about Xbox, Activision, or whatever, the true downfall for PlayStation could be this obsession with live service games, it’s obvious they desperately want to own a Fortnite/Warzone/Apex, but for every successful game as a service we’ve seen countless failures across the industry and they’re not learning from it at all.

I’m guessing one of these titles will be a Sony exclusive FPS to fill the hole that could be made if COD ever moves off the platform due to the MS purchase of Activision. Doing so sooner rather than later will give them time to gain space in their consumer base’s mind and to hone said title to the liking of the fan base. Just a guess but I dot think I’m going too far out on a limb with it.

@4kgk2 i don’t even like Marvel that much and i would probably buy that idea. Spider Man and Spider Man 2 is a pass for me and those are incredibly well made games. Wolverine slightly has my attention if done right.

@Flaming_Kaiser become the new Ubisoft, all their games on PS4 was the Ubisoft treatment. I used to call my PS4 the Ubisoft action adventure box. I hated it outside of God of War, i am liking PS5 much better, so much more variety in development.

God I hope these live services game fail miserably and then Sony learns there lesson and gets back to 80% percent of their catalog being single player games.

Live service doesn't mean they are necessary multiplayer focussed games.

Assassins creed valhalla, Genshin impact, animal crossing and no man's sky are live service games and are primarily single player experiences.

Live Service just means a game that gets regular content drops.

As usual people getting freakd out over the 60-40 split investment into live service and single player games. If some folks actually spent some time looking at the graphs they would have noticed that investment into single player games has actually increased year-on-year from FY22. It's the live service stuff that's stacked on top of that.
Also do people literally forget that it takes considerably lot more resources and money to support a multiplayer game over time as compared to a traditional " one and done" Single Player experience?
Interesting that under the " New IP " section we get indirect confirmation that Bluepoint, Housemarque, Valkyrie and Firesprite are indded working on brand new games.

It's amazing the number of people who were concerned about the live service route who are now fully on board with the idea because Sony have made this announcement. It's also great that these people are now telling us that the definition of a live service game isn't what we all thought it was.

Some people are so blind to reality.

@__jamiie yep live services games are bad! we dont want them! sony - we are amking 60% of our gamer lives service. live services are the best! i cant wait!

Playstation land at Alton Towers when please Sony 👍

@UltimateOtaku91 and all of those require the team to work on said game long term. less resources to make new games.

@Toot1st To make the base game yes but once thats done it will only be part of the team making the regular content drops, whilst the main bulk of the team work on their next project.

I don't see why people have such a problem with Sony making some live service games? Both Nintendo and Microsoft have a lot of live service games and no one says anything about them, but no matter what Sony do there will always be haters.

Man, some people really don't understand nuance. Personally, I don't mind it at all. I don't play multiplayer games, so I just focus on the single player content of those games.

@__jamiie yes, and those were exactly the same people. Clearly.

@OmegaStriver if you were to pay more attention, you'd realize that's not the case. They're spending even more money on single player games. So this hasn't affected single player games. As another person said, multiplayer games simply cost more. And that doesn't even take into account the fact that some live service games have the same single player content they've always had, like Gran Turismo.

I absolutely hate live service games, but I am going on past experiences which usually result in awful experiences. Let's face it, the only live service game to have experienced any kind of success is Destiny. Who we bought. I'm hoping Sony are going to be like Apple in this instance, join that live service party late and reinvent the wheel and create a SP game with live service elements. (That is actually good) imagine a live service game like Uncharted, where over time you can pay to unlock adventures (new storylines, new islands and locations) but host a proper developed story.

So given Sony's history and the reality of live service games in general 60% of the titles will be dead on arrival. Sounds great.

Get a grip guys 🙄 can we wait and see what these games are/consist of before binning them? A lot of cringe in these comments.

Daily reminder that once again, live service games are not always solely multiplayer, co-op or MMOs. It just has constant updates and content being added to it

@EquiinoxGII TF2 (very successful), Fortnite (very successful), Apex (very successful), Warframe (very successful), World of Tanks (very successful), Diablo (very successful), Warzone (very successful), Fall Guys (very successful), GT (very successful), CSGO (very successful), FF14 (very successful), Path of Exile (very successful), any Fifa (very successful).

There are many live service games and many many successful ones. Which is why this industry will keep moving towards them

Edit: expect a live service Ghost of Tsushima game as well after the success of Legends

Does this mean we may not see many exclusives tonight as Sony don't tend to show to far in advance?

@UltimateOtaku91 That what happens when you build your fan base solely off of single players games…. It not any different with Microsoft struggling to sell to JRPG or purely single players games to their fan base.

12 GaaS (Good as a Sh*t) crap.... wasn't it 10 a few weeks ago?

Title of this article says something about 2 major games per each genre, so there is hope that around 20 games a year may be good.

@djlard It's not 2 per genre each year, rather 2 each year total and they could be of any genre. For example 2023's 2 big PS5 PS Studios exclusives could be Spider-Man 2 and TLoU Factions 2, next year's could be Wolverine and the live service Horizon game, etc.

Just as a FYI, 60% of a business model does not mean 60% of games are GaaS. It just means that Sony anticipates 60% of its value to come from GaaS. That sounds very hit or miss, but consider Grand Theft Auto V. A single player game with a GaaS portion that has brought in $7.7 BILLION in 10 years. That one game would go a long ways towards covering that 60% business model.

N.i.c.e. lets go sony.more games from the g.o.a.t. 🐐 👑sony is welcome.word up son

The 60/40 split in favor of multi-player games is definitely concerning, since I and many others here prefer playstations singleplayer projects. I will try and be somewhat optimistic though since a live service game isn't necessarily a bad thing. As longs as the games are good I won't be complaining

With 60% bring live service. What happened to the "live service won't effect single player" line people kept regurgitating.

60% is way 2 high and very concerning that PS are headed in a direction that I and alot of others do not want them to

@Kidfried That’s just kind of confirming it for me then as I don’t really play the games you’re speaking of. I didn’t touch the MP portion of Ghost, only the single player stuff.

@Texan_Survivor @Yosuke , The SP/MP that is referenced in this article is not being interpreted correctly. Sure, 60% mentions live service, but if you notice the graphs for Single player games, the investment into them keeps on increasing and is actually comparable with the figures of FY19 where there is a 88-12 split. Sony didn't reduce budget for single player games,but is increasing them year on year.

This article is inaccurate , which is leading people to speculate incorrectly, I guess the Push Square staff should have changed it by now but hey, wording news like this is exactly what makes them generate clicks so I am not too surprised.

We've seen this GAAS/MP crap during PS3. Sony waisted a ton of good money and non if them stayed, got remade or are a as memorable as their single player games. It'll fail, it'll waist money and they go back to what they are good at.

That's really bad for me. I was always loyal to Playstation due to their pristine single player experiences and I hate live service games. 40% of single player experiences is a low figure for s playstation console 🤔 😳 😔

@jimbouk Sort of correct, games cost more to make now than they did during FY19 so I doubt it’s really an increase.

@Kidfried I did, then they wasted time and money making a live service portion and not a sequel.

From what I have seen, live service games try to extend their lifetime by drip feeding (selling) stuff. Which in turn, would lead to longer times between actual games.

I hope I’m horribly wrong and we still get 2-3 good single player games a year, but I really don’t like what I’m hearing from them.

@theMEGAniggle well you just made me look silly. Haha! Tbh I didn't even see some of those as live service games. But I suppose you are right. Even FIFA has live service elements. My point being as long as it's done right by Sony, it could be successful

Can’t imagine writing off 60% of something without knowing even .00001% about it.

Kung Fu Rider 2 on PS5, please.

@Bionic-Spencer I'm probably going to do the same, but have Sony confirmed that all the live service games are going to be MP? Aren't SP games with reasonably frequent updates/add ons technically live services?

@Ravix Yes exactly Gen Z and now Gen Alpha are leaning more heavily towards social driven live service games while the aging but larger millennial and Gen X generations still lean more towards single player experiences from childhood.

The main question for Sony is how many millennials and gen x can they monetise via gaming hours with them as the age. I have definitely reduced my hours since getting additional working responsibilities and a family (lot of friends are the same) where as 10 years ago I'd happily get in 60-80 hours of gaming per week in and I am only in my mid 30s now!

40% SP is pretty good for 2025 and I would guess as Gen Z age and Gen Alpha hit adult age in time for GTA 6 and PS6 it will be more like 20% SP by 2030.

Oh Sony, I think you're going down a dead end here. but please learn from the GaaS disaster. Because you can only do better if you learn from your mistakes.

Unfortunately, I fear that one or the other studio will be closed because of this.

When he says 60% Im pretty sure he means revenue, not that 60% of the games they are making will be live service. Good luck with that btw. I think they will push out as many games as possible the next few years and see what sticks, then keep supporting that one.

The absolute majority of pure live service games dies really fast anyway. Anyone for a game of "Destruction Allstars"? And thats just one example....

@Lembit @TechGuyChris The graph clearly illustrates a 60 - 40 split in financial investment, not revenue. It would be completely bizarre to predict revenue generated on 12 unfinished projects without any knowledge of their critical or commercial reception.

@EquiinoxGII haha almost everything has live service elements these days. Sony even consider MLB The Show to be live service

@BlueBeemer But the normies aren't mad tho. The one who are mad, people who hang around on sites like this, aka their hardcore fan base, are generally upset which are the people I’m talking about.

They should divert manpower from horrible live service and mobile games to making more PS exclusives.
2 exclusives a year ain't cutting it, imho.

@LiamCroft Yes and look how long it’s been since we got a new AC. Just constant updates to the same game for five years instead of new ones. Live service needs to die.

@DefiledViper Valhalla came out two and a half years ago.

@Intr1n5ic It was a metaphor 🤦🏻‍♂️…

@DefiledViper An inaccurate one.

@Intr1n5ic It’s accurate. Metaphors aren’t facts. The reality is many games do go on for absurd lengths of time, and new games or sequels get pushed back in favor of reusing assets and milking the existing game. So to my broader point, even single player “live service” games are a problem, even if there are better examples of that than Valhalla.

@Fyz306903 I would worry about live service games that are abandoned, even if they were single player. I guess I am mostly happy to play a single player game that I own on disc and there is no chances of a server closure or that ilk dampening my experience. 🙏🏻

@DefiledViper I know they're not facts, but they're also not over exaggerations used to inaccurately represent a franchise that doesn't fit the point you're trying to make.

@Bionic-Spencer you know not every live service game is online right or do you assume every live service game is mp only

@Fyz306903 Best example I an think of is Assasins Creed Valhalla

@Grumblevolcano hmmm so again same genre games...

@Fyz306903 yes basicly anything with a season pass and consistent updates is a live service game

@BeerIsAwesome I think we really need Sony to tell us there definition of what a live service game is.

@IOI GaaS games can work if done with single player in mind. GaaS just means continuous updates after launch such as what Spiderman, Final Fantasy XV, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Animal Crossing: New Horizons had. Live service is likely what you're thinking of which tend to focus on multiplayer and require a constant internet connection which includes MMO's, Fortnite, Genshin Impact, Gran Turismo 6, etc.