
There’s a huge amount of chatter about exclusivity in the aftermath of Microsoft’s decision to port select titles to PlayStation and choppy waters in the industry at large. This year alone has seen thousands of game developers laid off, as the industry attempts to course correct following over investment during the coronavirus pandemic.
But as budgets for tentpole titles like Marvel’s Spider-Man 2 soar, many are beginning to question whether the traditional exclusivity paradigm is even feasible anymore. It’s a topic PlayStation’s well-liked ex-executive Shawn Layden has touched upon in a huge interview with Games Beat – and he believes sticking to a single format may be the Achilles’ heel of the industry’s most expensive releases.
“When your costs for a game exceed $200 million, exclusivity is your Achilles’ heel,” he explained. “It reduces your addressable market. Particularly when you’re in the world of live service gaming or free-to-play. Another platform is just another way of opening the funnel, getting more people in. In a free-to-play world, as we know, 95 per cent of those people will never spend a nickel. The business is all about conversion. You have to improve your odds by cracking the funnel open.”
Layden pointed to the recent success of Helldivers 2, which is a PlayStation published game that released day-and-date on both PS5 and PC – a relatively new approach from Sony which has proven wildly successful.
Of course, Helldivers 2 is a live service game, so what does that mean for the platform holder’s bread-and-butter single player titles? “If you’re spending $250 million, you want to be able to sell [your game] to as many people as possible, even if it’s just 10 per cent more,” he pointed out. “The global installed base for consoles – if you go back to the PS1 and everything else stacked up there, wherever in time you look at it, the cumulative consoles out there never gets over 250 million. It just doesn’t. The dollars have gone up over time. But I look at that and see that we’re just taking more money from the same people.”
Layden believes the industry needs to expand beyond its current market. “We’re not doing enough to get heretofore non-console people into console gaming,” he noted. “We’re not going to attract them by doing more of the sh*t we’re doing now. If 95 per cent of the world doesn’t want to play Call of Duty, Fortnite, and Grand Theft Auto, is the industry just going to make more Call of Duty, Fortnite, and Grand Theft Auto? That’s not going to get you anybody else.”
PlayStation, in general, is registering record revenues at the moment – but its costs are through the roof. It’s rumoured titles like Marvel’s Spider-Man 2, as alluded to by Layden here, cost over $200 million to make, meaning there’s little margin for error. Exactly how it’s going to wrestle with these ever-increasing budgets when enthusiasts continue to demand bigger and better games remains to be seen.
[source venturebeat.com]
Comments 102
The answer is to release first party games on other consoles and PC after 6 months. The die hard fans will play it on day one just like always but they then get to monetise Xbox, Switch/2 and PC players in the same year.
As for development budgets it’s probably long past time when games need to be smaller and can go back to £60. It takes almost an entire console generation develop the biggest AAA games and that’s simply too long. Some developers are releasing one game per generation and it’s just not sustainable.
What we need is smaller games that can have a sequel out in three years instead of 5+.
It's pretty straightforward - Anything costing more than 200 million, or that's live service, definitely benefits from being on more platforms.
You want to attract people to your own platform too obviously, so a brief window of exclusivity does no harm either, plus the usual platform exclusives.
@MaddieTian With regards to games going back to £60, that ship has sailed I believe.
I have no doubts that the cost of developing games will be reduced, but we'll still be paying the new prices on every platform.
With the way things are going... In a couple of more years, we won't have to worry about exclusivity. Xbox as we know it is dying, and probably only have half a generation left, and Playstation is already releasing their game on PC.
@jt887
Not true at all. Perhaps it’s because I’m in the privileged position of being able to afford all consoles if I wanted to, but I’d much prefer all games to be exclusive to their platform as it means the devs can accomplish more quality in their games in the same amount of time and to the same budget. Having to worry about multiple different architectures and capabilities is an unnecessary time sink. People also don’t get the most out of their hardware when games are multiplatform.
Of course I’m not talking about online multiplayer games that need a player base to survive. I don’t care about them. Often I don’t even consider them games as much as hang out spaces.
Funny that the guy who greenlighted the first wave of 200+ million ps games now wants to enlighten us with "the truth". Can't wait for Ryan interviews post PS, "Services aren't the answer we need more single player games" lol.
He should know as a former Sony suit guy that console sales are one if not the biggest Sony income source since the ps4 era, the ps4 sales saved Sony from the possibility of bankruptcy lol. In a world where pc is already big if you take exclusivity you take console sales. It doesn't matter how much software can sell if you lose the whole company while you shift business. That's why companies don't do it until it's completely necessary like SEGA and that's why with a stable economy you will never see Nintendo games on pc ... legally.
The thing about smaller games is something we all agree has to happen, not much new info there.
@jt887 Im not a console warrior and would prefer games stayed exclusive because I like both competition and having my console be worth more than how powerful it is, sorry to break it to you.
@jt887 I'm not a fan of exclusives, but they have their place. If all games came to all platforms would we even see games like God of War and The Last of Us that are specifically funded to make the difference between the two console. Perhaps not. Be careful what you wish for.
There are plenty who are opposed to the end of exclusivity but the reality is with these ever expanding budgets and development times, it is something that simply is unsustainable.
People keep saying these games wouldn't be made without exclusivity but if for example Sony thinks they can sell an extra 10 to 15 million copies of Spider-Man 3 if it launched elsewhere as well as PS5, then of course they'll make the game.
Of course there is a balance but it's painfully obvious that the margins on the current business model are shrinking
Bring back Shawn
@jt887 Nonsense. I prefer exclusive games not to affirm my purchase of the console. Rather, exclusives games ALWAYS play best on PS5. Nothing can outperform sony’s 1st party games, technical/performance wise on PS5.
Maybe try making not just blockbusters but some AA games too? Or just smaller games. Those make great exclusives, Nintendo knows. Playstation already has just a few exclusive games at most, getting a console becomes pointless in this scenario, PCs are not that expensive, you can already get a comparable PC for 1000$, just add a newer GPU in a few years - and you have yourself a PS6.. Plus no need to pay for online.
I remember when he left Sony and around the time the PS5 was revealed he came out and said he could foresee less big big AAA exclusive games coming this new PS5 generation, due to potential costs and risk vs reward.
He wasn’t wrong about 3 years ago.
But I thrive on the top quality AAA games, single player campaign adventure types, so it’s a dam shame for me, as what he said all those years ago seems to becoming true.
@gymratAmarillo console sales may be a big income source but not necessarily for profit. PS5 just had its most successful year in terms of selling hardware yet their profit margin was below 6% for the holiday quarter. Something will have to give
The best thing about exclusive big AAA games mainly from Sony and Nintendo is the amazing quality overall.
The developers must be in heaven programming for just one console and the total focus on that console and a single player campaign.
And that is why those exclusive games come out to be amazing and at the pinnacle of gaming performance and experience.
Imagine asking Nintendo to put Mario, Pokémon and Zelda onto Playstation/Xbox consoles, you would get laughed at. The same should go for Sony as well, they have made Playstation the home of God of War, Uncharted, Spider-Man and TLOU, and these are the games people think about when they talk about Playstation so there's no chance they should let these games go elsewhere (console wise).
Such utter nonsense how everyone's against exclusivity nowadays, while that has been the sole reason for healthy competition and stellar games, generation after generation.
@carlos82 now imagine how much lower the margin would be if the console DOESN'T sell lol. The Sony stock value depends directly of how many consoles Sony sells.
The problem is clear as day, you can't spend 1/4 billion for every game you make and that has to change with or without exclusivity.
@Specky seems like people would prefer mediocre quality games like Assassins Creed that everyone can play to high quality titles like Ghost Of Tsushima that were only possible because developers were focused on one platform and Playstation needed this type of quality to sell their ecosystem. I'm sure investors would prefer that since Assassins Creed definitely makes more money
Long live Sony and Nintendo exclusives.
@gymratAmarillo oh I agree that they can't keep just making these huge budget games and should mix them up with smaller titles. Not just Sony either but the entire AAA gaming industry
I own all 3 consoles, so don’t miss out on any. That’s the way it has to be and it’s still a relatively cheap hobby.
But honestly SM2 cost £300m, it’s sold 10m. At an average of probably £55 (if not higher) which is £550m. So it’s making money and it’s making good money. So I personally don’t think big AAA need to go multi plat. For any console.
What should go multi plat is live service and smaller titles. HD2 should have been for instance. Not because it will sell loads more, but as marketing, you show those Xbox players (who only have an Xbox) the quality of titles that you get through Sony, this in turn can bring in more to the ecosystem.
Of course it is.
PlayStation Studios went from AAA games costing 100 million at worst to producing games that cost 300 million and are serving SAME customers as they were few years ago.
As Spencer said. You either find a way to get more money from same people, or you need to find new customers.
@TwoDents Exactly, all this talk has only recently started because of Microsoft, no one cared last gen, or the gen before that and so forth. Microsoft didn't care when they were paying for Tomb Raider, Dead Rising and Titanfall exclusivity, they didn't care when they were buying entire publishers for billions and making their games exclusive, but now all of a sudden because their plans are failing they are bringing their games elsewhere and Sony are bad for getting third party exclusives and not bringing HellDivers 2 to Xbox 🙄.
@PsBoxSwitchOwner "But honestly SM2 cost £300m, it’s sold 10m. At an average of probably £55 (if not higher) which is £550m. So it’s making money and it’s making good money. So I personally don’t think big AAA need to go multi plat. For any console."
You are forgetting that
1. Sony need to send 19-26% of revenue to Marvel for license.
2. Many from those 10 millions were sold through PS5 console bundle where Sony need to send 35-50% (from price of the game) to Marvel. Also, because they were bundling that game to console and they were selling that console with discount, it's pretty much obvious that they were not profiting from those copies of Spider-Man 2.
Basically Sony confirmed that they need to sell 7,2 million copies at full price just to break even.
@UltimateOtaku91 That's *****. Those talks are here for years, but were postponed during pandemic boom, because industry was growing rapidly and Microsoft and Sony thought that they would be able to grow their console business.
That was proven incorrect and industry is in recession for second straight year. So they need to find new audience because of ballooning cost of AAA game development.
Making games like Rise of the Tomb Raider, Dead Rising 3, Street Fighter V etc. was just easy, because budget of those games was pitiful compared to today. So you are investing exponentially more millions of dollars for exclusivity in market that is not growing. ROI is close to non-existent.
Head of development of Tekken 8 recently said that Tekken 8 budget was tripled compared to Tekken 7.
And Layden was warning about this for years. So it's not like this is a new thing.
I find it hilarious that Sony layed-off people in Insomniac Games, that made 3 games in 3 years and 2 of them sold more than 10 million copies and people here are pretending that everything is okay.
@MaddieTian Merging DLC and sequels (essentially resurrecting standalone expansion packs) might be a good solution. I don't need endless new mechanics and maps with every sequel if the base gameplay loop is good.
I could have played 5 sequels to Deus Ex Human Revolution with the same gameplay and graphics as long as the maps were interesting and dense with a few fun side quests.
He is absolutely right...Phil Spencer has said the same thing for the past decade and nobody wanted to listen.
The solution is simple... pay the devs less and work them harder. 🤷🏻♂️
@Captain_on_Deck
He ran PlayStation, he ran the platform holder so he knows better than anyone here what he is talking about.
In the end Nintendo's strategy seems the most sustainable, staying fully exclusive but focusing on a wide range of experiences and taking full advantage of the gold mine that is legacy content (Sony has a pre-PS4 gold mine that they're almost completely ignoring).
@TwoDents I think the timing of Microsoft's releases are a result of opening the floodgates, that there's seemingly no 1st party Microsoft releases on Xbox until May (Hellblade 2) and that their fiscal year ends in June.
Why is that no one ever tells Nintendo they need to put their games on other platforms? I mean I don't think they should but no ever expects it of them yet apparently Sony is "obligated" to share their stuff with everyone
Keeping making those big quality AAA games Sony and Nintendo they will lead the way and all this bulls**T talk will fade away.
Mainly the best games are exclusives due to that particular console because the developers can focus on one console and single player campaign.
The reason Xbox can’t get a true quality AAA game out is because the developer has to spend time and money producing the game for series s and series x and PC and cloud and all other devices the game is on. Also they are not always just single player campaign games but have online and multiplayer features.
It stretches the Xbox developer so wide and broad and you end up with Redfall, Forza and Starfield, good but not amazing AAA quality games, which is a backward step in gaming performance to me.
@UltimateOtaku91
I blame Sony themselves as well.
They've started releasing their games on PC and sparking all this crap.
What's the point of different consoles/ competition when a term like a "console-seller" is nonexistent?
If Nintendo and Sony games were Ubisoft quality, who'd even own these consoles?
Don't know why everyone seems to highlight Spiderman 2 as everything that is wrong with the current gaming landscape. Yes, it was very expensive to produce but it also made a huge profit. And it will come to PC in the future anyway, where it will also make more money.
The only problem is if your spending 200 million on making your game and it's not as good or marketable as Spiderman, in that case spend less making your game and charge the customer less.
I'm calling it now, Sony's next console will be their worst selling with only the casual sports/shooter bros buying it (which admittedly is a large percent of the market) but the hardcore and enthusiast gamers will move to PC. It's already happening right now and I can personally attest to that because I see no compelling reason to buy a PS5 other than early access to a very small number of first-party games, which I (and many others) can easily hold out 2-3 years for PC ports.
With Xbox already waving the white flag, the console market is entirely Nintendo's for the taking and all they had to do was maintain the status quo.
Corporations used to love all of these pathetic fanboy console wars because it was free publicity and it kept an army of loyal customers/cult members.
But unless those same people are willing to pay $120 a game they simply are not making enough money back to cover their loses.
On the subject of exclusives, Deviation Games has just been shut down.
@get2sammyb
Going multi-platform won't magically solve the issue of games costing too much to make. Xbox isn't some untapped land of riches, its a smaller install base with gamers who typically aren't into Sony's narrative focused SP games, on top of that many don't step outside of Gamepass.
@jt887 facts. couldn’t care less about exclusives just give me games . especially now that crossplay and cross-save is a thing, if i feel like playing on pc , ps5, or switch i can do it
if there was no exclusivity there would be no need for owning more than one platform, and eventually there would be no need for traditional consoles at all as PC and cloud gaming would take over and MS would cream itself at having finally won the console wars 😅 and then all games would become streamable subscriptions and eventually they would all completely suck
Progress 👏
Just make more fun AA games to fill the gaps, and don't just rely on CoD, GTA and EA Sports to sell your consoles to one group of people. Target the family games market a bit more and give people with young kids more of a reason to have a PlayStation in their living room. That's surely a good strategy that won't negatively affect any of the other stuff. But don't go crazy pouring money in to live service to try and achieve that, take a Nintendo approach.
There will always be some exclusives to each console but I think some of Sonys IP will eventually make it to rival consoles.
Ofc Layden says this he is the one that started the PC ports and lost Sony billions with the Gaikai initiative with the Cloud/play everywhere. The same strategy in which MS is failing miserably
@Godot They are addressing budgets cause going from 100 to 300 in budget in one gen (and Marvel funds 180 per leaks!) and the foundation of the game is already built and iterated on.. then we got Naughy Dogg acting suprised they have to support live-service long term after wasting what another 200 mill for a mode that should'v been included in 2 (or remaster). If I was the money guy like Totoki I would look at those California studios very suspiciously.
Part of the reason PlayStation exclusives are usually so special is because they are exclusives. Do I still think they will be great even if they are multiplatform games? Sure, but again, part of the reason why they are so special is that the developers can focus on whichever PlayStation system they are working on and maximizing that. Look at what they did near the end of last gen. Ghost of Tsushima and The Last of Us Part II looked so good it was like a preview of what the PS5 was going to be.
I have a lot of time and respect for Shawn Layden but let's not forget here that it was under his watch that Sony's budgets started ballooning and while he did push for more AA level games, the wider PlayStation community just wasn't interested.
On the subject of 'development' - I guess if you have just a Single platform to develop for, regardless of how well 'specced' it is, you can build games to that limited spec and save money on porting, optimising and supporting other hardware.
The Switch for example has 1080/60 games that run 'flawlessly' on that hardware but we are seeing some games on PS5 struggling to offer 1080/60 on PS5. Of course Polygon counts, the density of detail/objects etc etc maybe significantly higher, but they weren't 'built' specifically for PS5, specifically for PS5's 'limited' hardware. Its much easier to 'tweak' a game, reduce or even remove things that go 'over' budget. Its a bit more tricky when some hardware will offer the 'full' vision ad your 'scaling' it down to fit on a Console. Point is, you have a 'fixed' spec, a limited 'budget' and limit the game/ambition etc to that budget to ensure it 'runs' as intended. 3rd Party build their 'vision' and then try and fit it to the limited spec.
At the end of the day, an Exclusive is ONLY there to get you to buy that Hardware - which then gets you 'locked' into that platform. You'll end up buying Subscriptions (even if the Basic tier PS+ just to play online), games, DLC/MTX, peripherals etc - how much does Sony make from 3rd Party Software on 'their' system. Its not done for 'the gamer', its done to ensure you buy a Playstation, an Xbox and/or a Switch.
MS may well be selling Games like Sea of Thieves on PS5, but they'll make money from that - maybe not as 'much' as they make on Xbox as Sony will take their '30%' cut. If Helldivers 2 came to Xbox, Sony could make a LOT more money but MS too would get 'some' money.
All an Exclusive is really a tool for the Platform holder to get you into their Ecosystem. Once its served its purpose, Sony are now selling them on PC knowing that anyone who really wanted to play, would have bought hardware to play it, now selling to the 'PC' community who probably won't buy a PS5.
I think Sony are probably pivoting already (behind the scenes) they have already been stoic that day and date subscription release was not the best model, and the plateauing of Microsofts growth with GP, appears to support Sony's conviction on the matter. I don't see Xbox as a brand being part of their strategy to multiplat though. But I think they should pivot to releasing most titles on PS5 and PC in parrallel. They would capture that initial hype, marketing investment and gain way more income than releasing on PC 2-3 years later. The PC community has moved on by that point. Lets say as an example Ronin couldve been PS5 exclusive initially (well known studio with established rep), then something like Stellar Blade which is something of an unknown quantity in the AAA space at least, would've been perfect for dual release PC/PS5 imo. I personally will always go console irrespective of a parrallel release model. Ease of access, lower cost point.
So that's a former Exec and the current Sony games COO Hiroki Totoki both in agreement with Phil Spencer of Xbox saying exclusivity is a thing
Hiroki Totoki said that exclusive games do not make enough money on just PS5 alone which is why they started to bring them to PC to try and recoup some of the costs, he also mentioned that he wants to bring more games to PC and other platforms (he left "platforms" a bit vague but it seems like he means other consoles), I think games like Helldivers 2 is a good example as like 80% of that playerbase is PC players had it just been a PS5 game it would likely have started to die out already
The future of no exclusives or at least a move to just timed console exclusives is coming much quicker than fanboys would like to admit, like now we can just get a PC and play the best of PS and Xbox and to be honest this will be the best future for gamers
It's true that consoles are almost constantly hitting a market saturation point now. There is growth and I'd imagine there always will be but the growth is miniscule at this point and can't keep up with the ballooning budgets. The dilemma Sony faces is they need to expand without cannibalising their ecosystem/store. Which is exactly what they are trying to do now with a Pc and mobile push. Will it work or not, who knows but honestly I don't really care if it does or not. I'm bored of this debate and whatever happens, happens.
I'll always believe in exclusives, heck even the streaming tv services have exclusive shows to entice you to subscribe, but I try to look at things from all perspectives as well. I'd love to see Sony and MS keep their first party games (with the exception of multiplayer-focused releases) tied to their respective consoles but if the $ aren't adding up, businesses will change course.
Sony just needs to copy Nintendo.
@Gamestation Nope, Totoki already clarified that by multiplatform, he was talking about PC & Mobile.
Bringing a game to multiple platforms increases the number of clients - doh! Took them a looong time...
They stand to gain much more by doing this than by going exclusive in an effort to lure people to buy consoles.
@MrMagic well still it shows that Sony know their console exclusives don't make enough money to be viable to be a single platform release anymore, I would anything that next generation of consoles we will see the beginning of the end of console exclusives, if Sony is bringing games to PC and mobile this generation to recover costs once we get even bigger and costly games they will once again need to find more money to cover them
Exclusivity sells consoles! Exclusivity is paramount to any brand and there’s no question about it. How about you just don’t make games that cost 200 million dollars? Gamers will play good games that aren’t major productions.
@AdamNovice people are reactionary, that’s all. They hate Jim Ryan so they selectively remember Layden’s “greatness”.
Shawn was right about game budgets ballooning 3-4 years ago (hardly anyone believed him then and called him out) and he is right once again, but people don't want to listen to him yet again. He knows this industry.
This is the part most people do not seem to grasp when discussing this topic on here, and prefer to throw shade at the other platforms instead.
And his quotes do not necessarily mean exclusives will end, they may decide to make smaller or cheaper games as an example, but something has to change. Games can't keep getting more expensive when the market does not increase at the same level
Pay attention to what this guy is saying, PlayStation was great when he was around, would love him back
@Gamestation They could hit the point when they need to expand again if PC, Mobile and Playstation becomes not enough to sustain them and they can't find a way to reduce budgets.
PC & Mobile gaming are massive markets though so if they are successful on them then I'd imagine they'll be able to easily hold out until AI becomes advanced enough to reduce game budgets. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens.
How can the PlayStation player base concurrently gripe about key PS exclusives going to PC, and agree with Layden that big budget exclusives can’t survive if they stay exclusive?
@AverageGamer how in the world in Xbox dying? They are just changing strategies actually they ain't even changing strategies they have been saying this stuff for the last 4 years
@waynesworld $1000 is expensive
@waynesworld what a stupid comment you just cherry picked a game you don't like to boost your point firstly assassin creed is very popular just because you don't like it doesnt mean it's mediocre.i found ghosts a boring slog. Secondly I see you didn't used third party titles such as the Witcher, GTA, red dead l, cyberpunk, resident evil I could go on and on.
Here come all the real experts in the comments
@UltimateOtaku91 You guys
are fine with street fighter V being exclusive your excuse being "oh sony funded it" meanwhile dead rising which started on 360 and had the third entry funded/published by Microsoft is bad if exclusive right? Sony tries to get starfield exclusivity then Microsoft swoop in and buy the company, see Sony keeping whole modes in cod exclusive then buy that company too, learn to take some L's fellas because that's just business and they've just copied out of Sony's playbook, either way you guys gonna be paying Phil Spencer his money might already have with these games that just came to PS5
rise of tomb raider i first played that on PS same for titanfall can't say the same for FF7 remake which was paid to be kept off of specific platforms 🙄
@Toot1st Assassins Creed's are not awful games, I enjoy some of them, but they are not masterpieces by any means. Ubisoft games and optimization is disliked by gaming community for a reason. When I load Sony exclusives I expect quality and I'm never disappointed, despite liking some games more than others. The quality is always there. Rockstar Games might be the only other developer on Naughty Dog level. CDPR didn't deliver with Cyberpunk, the launch was awful for both PC and consoles, the game was not what everyone hoped for, but sure in 2-3 years they updated the game to an adequate level. Bethesda games are lacking for years now as well as EA games, the list goes on. Resident evil might be another great series, I agree. Also indie developers are bringing quality too.
1000$+ is not expensive if you also use your computer for anything other than gaming like many people do. It sucks for people like me who don't like Windows and getting a good PC means getting it only for games, which is expensive, yes. But most people have laptops that can run games at least on medium setting, just enough to enjoy the experience.
@Captain_on_Deck
So are you saying the actual guy that ran the entire PlayStation division for years is wrong???
Give that question a thought...
Shawn the fatso de facto incompetento Layden,worst thing to happen to Playstation in long time, diluting your brand in the wake of economy crisis omg how,why ? They get nothing from PC,in long term it's suicide,Sony doesn't have any other sector to rely like Microsoft,soo Shawn pls shut up.Personally don't care but have Uber PC ,PS5 and switch,get best of everything but for Sony PC ports are doom...
Sorry for the bad english
@Player_1_Ready yes he is dead wrong!!! His incompetence lvl reach that of Shill Spender
Jack tretton and shawn layden are the best.word up son
@jt887 I disagree. Exclusives are IPs. Corporations do not have to share their IPs for any industry. If that is the case, Ferrari needs to share its V12s with lower tier brands because people feel that sharing is carrying.
lol I understand the point he’s trying to make with the number of copies bought vs a game’s budget, but using the same 250 million number for players and equating that to the same number in dollars of budget makes 0 sense. It’s basic math: it will take less than that many purchases to break even or turn a profit. It’s not $1 per purchase lmfao
I don’t understand this attitude that everyone has to share. IPs or intellectual property doesn’t work like that. Entities or corporations are under no obligation to share their IPs. As the goal of a business for any industry is to get people to buy into their product. I hope Sony and Nintendo keep their exclusives. PC isn’t a direct competitor and never has been for the consoles. As most consumers won’t spend a lot on a PC just to play some games. I think modern gamers have such of an entitlement. Remember gaming is just luxury hobby.
It's funny how people that can't accept the painful truth on here doubt Shawn's words without realizing that he was the most successful PlayStation CEO Sony ever had.
If anyone knows how PlayStation runs in and out it's Shawn Layden.
@jt887
The only people who care about exclusivity are console warriors?
Bro if exclusives didn't exist PlayStation and Nintendo probably wouldn't exist right now.
Kind of a dumb take, no offense
I fundamentally disagree with this. I play my PlayStation and Switch instead of my Xbox and Steam because I prefer the exclusives. That simple. I used to buy third parties on Xbox last generation to support the Xbox ecosystem, but why do that? Now I just buy everything on PS unless I want it portable, then I buy it on the Switch. Why press a button on my TV to switch HDMI inputs, you know? It sounds like a nothing thing, but seriously I buy almost every game on PS now and that’s because of exclusives. If Xbox did better, like they were in the 360 era, it would be the other way around. The Xbox One sold PS4s, in my opinion. At the start of last gen, I told myself I’d stick to one platform and picked Xbox, but, by 2017, with the PS4’s lineup and Switch’s launch, I decided to get the big three and, as Xbox’s exclusive library has floundered, my use of the Xbox ecosystem diminished greatly. I still hope the Xbox ecosystem improves, but I’m losing trust in the platform this generation. Sony needs competition to do better themselves and they just don’t have it right now. The Xbox anti-exclusivity rhetoric only exists because PS is stagnant and Xbox is failing. No one is saying Mario needs to go on PS and Xbox and that’s because Nintendo has success in differentiating itself as a platform.
I get what you are saying, @TwoDents, but the first Titanfall was entirely multiplayer, no campaign whatsoever, and has been superseded by Titanfall 2, which had both a campaign and a multiplayer mode. There would be absolutely no need to have the first game now as it has been bettered by its sequel, which is available on the PlayStation. Had there been a campaign with the first game, and playing it was necessary to understanding, or appreciating, the story, then that would be a different thing.
It should also be remembered that the majority of Final Fantasy games do exist on the Xbox. The only notable exceptions are FF7 Remake and FF16. So in many ways, it is arguable that there exists a community for Final Fantasy on the Xbox, and so it is completely understandable that people there wish to play the more recent games, and that's before you consider the quality of FF7 and 16, which alone makes them desirable.
So, you are right, people here are not calling for Titanfall to release on the PlayStation because, well, there's just no point, whereas the wish to have FF7 and 16 on the Xbox is entirely understandable...
Forget about exclusives, in the following few years (western) publishers will be asking is it even worth making AAA games anymore, and I don't even want to know the cost of making (western) AAA games for next-gen console like ps6 or whatever microsoft call their latest xbox.
In the end nintendo is right leaving the AAA graphics race and focusing more on gameplay and not making powerful console.
The answer is that developers need to get their costs down, ai being an obvious example. As technology progresses of course we still want the big budget games that fully utilise the hardware, without them whats the point of progression?
I would think the problem is the costs. 🤷
@BacklogBrad They really won't.
Think about it.
The nintendo hardware can't run them, so only small scale ones can be ported.
The Xbox console is a small market hardly worth the porting cost risk.
It makes sense for Microsoft to port to playstation, but not the other way around.
Also, as others pointed out. Xbox customers are into gamepass and no longer buy games. The Xbox market is a dying one. Which is why Microsoft is going to nintendo and playstation with their games.
The only option here is the PC market.
@jt887 I feel like I can’t comprehend why people don’t understand the simplicity of console exclusives. You want someone to buy your machine, not your competitors. So what do you do? Make a game that is so good and they can only play it on your console, thus they must buy your console. This has nothing to do with console warrior stuff, this is literally the basics of business.
@Anthony_Daniels it’s people who don’t understand how business works who thinks exclusives should be gone. 🤦🏻♂️
This guy's just going with the flow. He knows how horrific it is for a console to lose its exclusives. He knows how well the PS4 sold and how impactful exclusives are. This guy's a progressive, he just goes with the flow and what's being talked about. I don't buy it
Nintendo does absolutely fine with exclusives. These companies need exclusives so they can entice players to their hardware. I’d rather system exclusives than some systems becoming obsolete which creates a gaming monopoly any day of the week
@Nem the switch is on its last year. The next one should bridge the gap some. 3rd party publishers are not going to ignore the switch 2 like the current one. Big budget AAA games cost too much and take too long. I dont think Sony is satisified with the profit margins on some of these massive titles. The switch 2 will be a huge market and Sony has plenty of games that should sell (and run) well on it. Sackboy, ratchet, returnal, etc. Obviously their big franchises would remain exclusive.
I am skeptical that disney/marvel will continue to let them make exclusives off of their IP. Square Enix sounds like they might be getting cold feet about timed exclusives too.
The rumor is that Sony is making a full blown storefront app for PC. The rumor says there would be a cross entitlement between devices, so basically day 1 pc releases. I am assuming that would eventually mean a mobile storefront as well. They are clearly exploring life outside the playstation platform.
There will definitely be less fully exclusive games throughout the industry and I expect Sony to realize the growth potential of multiplatform.
People need to wake up and realize they old way of gaming is stagnant. PlayStation still hasn’t even grown in console sales since the PS2 and it looks like they will never break that record again. Games like Returnal selling a million copies won’t cut it.
So this is all about PS vs XBOX? While nintendo don’t give a *****. You wanna play a zelda or mario? Buy our console dammit.
“We’re not doing enough to get heretofore non-console people into console gaming,”
I think there is a bit delusional to think people who don't play games and have zero interest in them will suddenly start playing games if you make different types of games. I am not saying you can't have sort term success like Wii, but they are a flash in a pan more to do with the hardware itself.
"...enthusiasts continue to demand bigger and better games remains to be seen."
"Better" demands players also, "bigger" is highly questionable
So what's the point in developing new and exciting hardware? Where is competition? All they want is to eliminate the risk. Less work for more money.
Hi All, - The Cost of Risk & Reward Software tends to indicate we are going to see a massive reduction in Original Ideas for A+ Games, as the sequels or known IP's rule the roost. - We are expecting more from our Games, but then baulk at the Higher Cost. - Rather than pay for New DLC, some of wait for a GOTY edition. - So, where do we go - .....? - You can see the Rental Market being put into Place - for example a small fee to rent the 1st few levels for a set time (2 weeks) - if you like, then that Price is deducted from the Final Cost. - I realise a lot of us like the Physical Copy, but if the Trial Rental Fee is low enough, there is no reason you can't then buy the Physical Copy. - As for Exclusivity providing a better experience, I am not a Software Engineer, but if the PS5 Code was then given to Microsoft, how difficult is it for them to make adjustments so it is performs better on their Console - Just an Idea ...?
Ok… so let’s apply this logic elsewhere….
“Netflix should put it movies on Amazon, 95% of the market won’t pay for Netflix so crack the funnel open”
If less of the industry was chasing the “Fortnite” money and the easy huge huge rewards that a one in a million and doing what they used to do…. Concentrate on just covering costs and making some profit.
Greed is the Achilles heel of the industry nothing else
It took me a long time to understand the console market is a giant hoax and a plague on your wallet. The value of these consoles greatly reduces when each generation, they do the same as last gen, but worse. Due to the "evolving" industry, the performance of games are greatly diminishing, so you won't feel the difference on a technical level with consoles.
Save money and buy one system that can do it all. Exclusives sell consoles, sure, but they're collateral on your wallet.
@Stocksy Netflix shows are on Amazon, iTunes and Google Play for a fee.
There is exclusivity and there is audience and ideas/impactful appeal the IP has. It's clear why casual games work. They appeal to people's hobbies, fetishes or whatever and make it more clear. I don't buy or play many of the biggest games IPs. If I didn't PS3/360, why would I PS4/Xbox One and PS5/Series. They seem to pick oh people will just buy into them. No I didn't then I won't now.
What about a painting figurines, or sculpting game? Where is a AAA version of that, oh an Indie may have done it. Something as simple as that can appeal to someone not just blockbusters based on movies. Remember also when games were games. I can still enjoy a puzzle game as just that or others being gamey, why not any other genres without them being movie inspired but still games but trying to blend the lines as much of cinematic/realistic while still having gamey elements that I'm fine with cutting the tedium out but still makes a point doesn't it?
Anybody that gets games have their own culture/visual language gets games. People that don't why would they care or understand red is explosives/white and yellow paint is a guide of where to go. They can't tell. That or thinking they can get passed something even though it's a 90 degree turn to avoid the fire, but think they can get around it but they can't because it's scripted. Last of Us 1 intro level I mean there.
Infamous 1 made me go oh I did a good or bad thing based on doing or not doing something. Second Son it was oh you have to go there and have good/bad points. It's not only gamey but made me go seriously? The no QTE but almost like that just reaction time to respond was a surprise. It may be the rest of the game isn't like that at all. But that intro scene presenting that to me was awesome. Some changes to games are a surprise these days of immersion or gameplay elements.
From animations to particle effects, sometimes you go oh this next gen will be great, we settle in and then they stop doing it, it's early gen stuff not later because it's too much effort or they changed direction.
It's like the first few episodes of an animated show, they can look good then they mellow as the first few episodes impressed but they can't keep it up forever can they with later episodes? Same with games sequels or game's later scenes.
Same with other people not into gaming. It's either other trends or their hobbies or other things they can make games out of. Maybe a crossword puzzle game is all they need. Do you need a PS5 for that nope. You can still buy them. Or play it for free on your phone. Gardening games? Rock Climbing? A maze? A mystery? A family drama story? A toybox?
Unpacking is a key example, it tells however much through just what it offers. No big CGI cutscenes or any action setpieces in it. XD Some developers just don't get casuals. If we get racing for dream cars (or those wanting a good progression structure which many times they don't for those fine with cars but want good uses for a game with them like any other characters in a game of another genre) and strategy or city builders (or themed around a university, hospital or anything else), why is it unclear about simulators or other things being appealing to casuals that AAA seem to not get.
Maybe we want a gardening empire, maybe something more saucey as an empire? Maybe just any simulation, or gamey take on a hobby? Maybe FMVs of some mystery/drama?
They can be AAA but it doesn't have to be a blockbuster to be high quality graphics, story telling or gameplay/artstyle.
If there is a AAA gardening game people will jump to it, no wonder many mobile or Indies can reach them besides just gamer type Indie games. Same with any strategy or city builder. Same with any creative building games. You get your odd 'I play what other people do' but if its their hobbies of gardening, rock climbing, fishing, board games or whatever you can make a game around it like an adventure through a children's book, or something the size of ants, a drama, a mystery. No wonder some simulators work. Some I think have a place others don't.
Not everything has to be a movie. Not everything has to be a fantasy/sci-fi journey like a book/movie. Sometimes they are puzzle games, or just things casuals like. Imagine that game industry. How stupid can they be. XD
If they want money by all means. If people drop off, why waste 5 years on a game, live service or not. If the characters/themes/worlds/artstyle/story/gameplay don't appeal who wants to play it. If the direction isn't interesting, who needs player retention, they have made it clear, they have moved on.
I'm not playing or buying them. Let alone accessing them free or not. Cosmetics or not. Progression and gameplay/level design matter sometimes.
My expectations may be high on possibilities (same with dual screen consoles again but I'm not expecting them to happen again) but not in the ways they think. Do I care about more adaptive enemy learning and unlearning attacks, puzzle, level design or giving health, animations, AI. Sure I do care for that being possible but I can get by without them though. I'm not caring about graphics. Animations need to be at least sub par then staring and lacking.
My expectations are low because of the current trends, I seek out games not following trends, they are high for Indies when they play inspirational nostalgia, when they play were trying something new I have low expectations because they are so good. My expectations for old games is low and still compelled by old ideas left behind then trends of today. I can go eh most shooters and their 1 stand out mechanic I can go oh these platformers/racing games may have been a genre but they stood out better, nowadays their only picking from hit games, so why would I want to play them their ideas are pretty weak.
It can happen. Indie puzzlers awesome, Indie platformers, pretty unappealing now for me. Some try harder then the other.
AAA want to be like movies or be this formulaic experiences, this trend, that trend. I'm not buying them, other people are. I'm buying the ones that stand out to me. I don't care. I'll play a gameplay focused game any day. Casuals or some gamers may. I personally don't care. Many of us don't care.
If people want a certain feel of a game/platform they will. We pick 1 or all 3 for different reasons.
Trends, or starting their own (if studios are willing to)/new ones or standing out in different ways.
Nintendo to me it's not the oh they have Mario/Zelda/Pokemon. I'm not playing them I am Fire Emblem (Tactics), Pikmin (strategy), Rhythm Heaven (rhythm party minigames, basically rhythm Warioware), Another Code (puzzle) and more. Their niche IPs that get early millions or not even. Even Pikmin 4 annoyed me due to some changes. I felt the series worked fine before the changes they made that made it more generic actually. Some were fair, others went too far I think and too like other games.
There is a reason I can go oh upgrades, versus oh collectibles to do the same thing (but seen as 'old design maybe') and simplifying design with skill trees many do these days. Menus covering up changes to the world to save time.
I care about variety and I care about gameplay/genres. Same with music, I care about the structure and sounds, or genres and a spin on them. So even if I were to pick 'graphics' being anime like with Fire Emblem or in other cases story sure some may have it, not all, I have tons of others to go for. I go for gameplay and yet all Sony PS3 and prior IPs I had a reason to pick them up. Nowadays I have no reason to pick them up as the trends/cinematic feel they go for and gameplay doesn't appeal to me.
I am likely to pick LocoRoco, EchoChrome/EchoShift, Gravity Rush, Knack (old God of War formula also), Song of the Deep, Patapon and more not because of their artstyles even if they differ, it's their gameplay. Not just the major IPs we had from that era I never got to play like God of War, MotorStorm, Infamous. I'm getting around to them now even besides the niche IPs of Japan Studio or Insomniac's Metroidvania from 2016 on PS4/Xbox One that most people looked at Ratchet 2016 towards instead or other 2016 games.
To me Sony and Microsoft both don't have first party directions I care for right now (they made changes, that's fine to stay alive they have to make changes for audience/appeal, they don't appeal to me so I'm not interested or they shut studios I was interested in down, if a studio's game doesn't appeal to me I go to others, if all their studios don't have games that appeal to me or they shut the studios down I have less reasons to stay with Sony's studios don't I hmm funny how that works the creative ones get shut down that I care about I have less games to make me want their platform) so I went to Nintendo for first party/genre variety I was seeking and other third parties there and currently my PS4 and Xbox One are good third party games, blu-ray players or backwards compatibility machines. Fine by me.
It's why with PS4/Xbox One. To me the PS3/360 left behind IPs I preferred, not the ones getting further sequels I had no interest in. So why would I buy them I'm not convinced because we have those IPs and less options now am I?
Otherwise it's PS1-3/PSP/Vita or OG/360 of retro titles I have interest in. As well as old Nintendo systems I never picked up and many third parties there I have interest in besides the first party.
Not nostalgia, I mean left behind 1, 2 offs or trilogies no body cares about that I have interest in their gameplay ideas for or understanding old trends and non-trend setters that are fresh and compelling games.
Or Indies not nostalgic-ally uninteresting me either and Indies that are interesting me being different too in their own way.
It suits me. Everyone else has their reasons for owning a PS5/Xbox Series console. I have mine.
It could be many things. I seek gameplay, everyone else seeks graphics, story, artstyle, themes, worlds, music, characters as well and much more.
well hello, college essay...
Yikes @SuntannedDuck2 that might be the longest comment in this website's history! 🤣
I don't fully agree with this guy.
He didn't mention the quality of the games at all. Look at Nintendo. They are quite successful with their exclusives and also can keep the development cost low(er). Take breath of the wild as an example, it is assumed it costs around $120 mio for development and they were able to shift millions of games.
Yes, it is a longasting franchise, however, the quality of the game is out of question!
If you decide to go exclusive, better be sure to not sell crap to people!
I really would like to know Jack Treton's idea as well. Jack come back from shadows plz!
@jt887 what are you talking about? then we have to buy a $1500+ pc every other year! With consoles, there's one purchase in 6 years
Removed - flaming/arguing
@Toot1st I never said that Xbox is dying, I said that the Xbox as we know it is dying. Meaning that the Xbox a lot of us grew up with is no more. This current strategy is not coming from the Xbox that I grew up playing hours of Halo and Gears on. It a vastly different beast, and I'm okay with that... But that means to me, the brand is dead. I've moved on, and that why I haven't even picked up their console this generation.
Yeah, don't listen to this guy.
If all games are going to go multiplatform, it will impact development time negatively (which they don't want and so they will make the game more generic to make up for the increase in difficulty and time required making it work on all platforms) and in addition those games won't effectively use the unique capabilities of a single platform.
The end result will be games that are more generic, less boundary pushing and is that something we really want?
Just ask yourself this, would FF7: Rebirth be the same quality game, in the same amount of development time, if it had to release day 1 on PS5, XBSX, XBSS and PC? I think not.
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...