Ainu20

This is a misleading title, he didn't say "PS6" at all, he was talking about new hardware in general. That could be interpreted as PS5, PS5 Pro, PS6, basically anything beyond the original platform Bloodborne released on. Technically PS4 Pro as well but I think we can all agree that ship has sailed long ago.

@__jamiie You're probably not the only one who expected it, but it was never a realistic expectation when you see GPUs priced above $1000 struggle with native 4k in modern games.

I wouldn't say that makes this generation half baked stop gaps, they still offer pretty much the best you could get at that price. It's just the reality of technology and economics.

Why can't some people just let Bloodborne stand on its own as a singular, magnificent achievement of gaming, instead of constantly demanding a sequel, as if it's somehow disrespecting fans that one hasn't been made yet? The game isn't diminished just because they didn't turn it into a franchise.

Don't get me wrong, an update to fix its frame pacing and up the framerate would've been welcome, but beyond that, I would be fine if they never touched the IP again. Not everything needs to become a multi-game franchise.

@ZhuckelDror Technically the second half of last is where it started, but you are right. However, before that, it was often simply 30 fps (or worse) for a lot of the games, which isn't exactly better.

The point is, the choice between performance or graphics is always there, no matter the hardware. The devs used to make that choice for us (on consoles), at least now we get to make it.

@ZhuckelDror I've always believed it doesn't matter how powerful a console is, you'll always have studios prioritizing graphics over performance. Even if the PS5 was twice as powerful, you'd still see that choice in many games, just at a higher level.

@bindiana Don't take it so personally, I simply disagreed with you.

If you would've said that it was one of the most appreciated games of the early days, I would've agreed with you. But carrying the PS5, you have to admit that was worded way too extreme.

I would argue the early days were mostly about people wanting to get the best version of cross-gen games. That's probably even the case in the not-so-early-anymore days, as cross-gen went on for waaaay too long.

Nice to read about a success story in these troubled times instead of the usual layoffs for a change!

@bindiana Astro's Playroom most certainly did not "carry" the PS5 at launch, and it definitely isn't a major IP. Sure, everyone was praising it and rightly so, but it also came included with every console. You overestimate fans beyond the core audience. It's not the sort of game that the mainstream will go out and buy a console for.

The biggest question mark here is VR. If Asobi doesn't support PSVR 2, then who? On the other hand, a lot of people will be disappointed if it's VR only.

I'm going to guess this will be playable both with and without VR in its entirety, to appease both sides. That would've made it a headache to design, but if anyone can do it, it's surely this studio.

@djlard I get being disappointed with the amount of games that are designed to get the most out of the PS5, but why open a post with such a blatant false statement like "except FF16 there is nothing you cannot play also on PS4"?

Everyone, including yourself, knows this is simply not accurate, so what are you trying to achieve with that?

@LifeGirl And yet yours is the most preachy post in here so far.

Been waiting for this one! I honestly thought we might have to wait until 2025, looking at how long localization took for Ys 9, so I'm happy with this.

@themightyant Exactly. A lot of people here want Sony to release more first-party games and I'm sat here thinking "well, there's only so many hours in a day".

My PS wrap-up told me I played 1400+ hours across 76 single-player games on my PS5 last year, which is basically equivalent to a full-time job (on top of my actual job). All that and I'm still a couple of years behind and haven't even been able to touch any of the big 2023 releases, or even stuff as far back as Elden Ring in early 2022.

I'll never understand how people are running out of games to play.

@Czar_Khastik Ah yes, we all know the feeling. "Checks massive backlog for a new game to play. Hmmm, there's a sale going on, let's buy 5 more!"

@Friendly The thing is, there are plenty of third party studios filling in those gaps. Not with those existing IPs of course, but still games of similar size and quality. Obviously most of those aren't going to be exclusives, but does that ultimately matter if you've got both those and the big AAA first-party titles available on the same console?

Over the years, it has become clear that Sony's strategy of only producing the highest budget AAA titles to attract players and leave the rest to the third party studios has worked, and it's easy to see why. We sometimes put a heavy focus on first-party output, but in the end, the only thing that matters to the player is the totality of the available library on the platform.

@Martijn87 People can't be wasting time on such trivial activities like reading articles, when there are outraged posts waiting to made. This is the internet you know, there are rules here.

@UltimateOtaku91 That's not what it says, it says no "new major existing franchise titles". It rules out, for example, Ghost of Tsushima 2 before then, but there are a number of studios that we know have been working on new IP for a while now, like Bend Studio, Bluepoint and even Naughty Dog.

@TrickyDicky99 Nah, that's too simple. Games still sell if they look appealing enough. Hell, even games that didn't necessarily have the highest expectations can still sell a bunch if they're actually fun, just look at the likes of Granblue Fantasy and Helldivers 2.

Immortals of Aveum's problem was it never excited anyone during previews, and then the game released and its critical reception only confirmed those early impressions. You can't get away with that unless you've already built up some brand recognition, which they obviously hadn't.

@Darylb88 Sure, it's a concern. Given the choice, I'm sure Sony would rather not hand out early dev kits to MS, I just don't think it's the end of the world.

And yes MS obviously has more resources than Sony, but does that give them an advantage in supply chain and manufacturing? I wouldn't be so sure about that; they're still a software company first, while Sony has a long and rich history as a hardware technology company.

There's not much more we can do than speculate.

@Rjak I still think big exclusives are an important way for platform holders to draw players into their ecosystems. It's true that digital libraries make it harder for people to switch platforms in the short-to-medium term, but there will always be new generations of players, that battle never ends.

Anyway and more importantly, just wanted to compliment you on an excellent choice of avatar. It's not often I see Carpenter Brut on video game forums.

@Darylb88 I doubt the dev kits are a deal breaker. If Sony wants to continue getting timely COD releases that run well on potential new hardware (PS5 Pro in the short term, PS6 in the longer), then they have no choice but to send dev kits to ABK early. And even if they didn't, it's safe to assume both MS and Sony have ways to get their hands on each other's dev kits anyway.

Regardless, by the time dev kits are getting sent out, you have to assume final specs are basically set in stone and it would be hard (and very costly) to make meaningful changes to the planning of supply chain and manufacturing at that point. So I don't see how MS can use early dev kit info to give themselves an advantage, without delaying their own hardware and thus giving themselves a disadvantage in the process.

Those smaller games like Hi-Fi Rush and Pentiment would make perfect sense for MS. They're not the type of exclusives that sell Xboxes so it wouldn't really move the needle, but it gets them some additional sales and might draw some extra users into their ecosystem.

They're also the type of games I'd love to try, so from a selfish point of view I'd be perfectly happy if they kept the big titles exclusive and made these multiplatform.

@jamison1993 Most companies, maybe. But definitely not a company that's into their 4th generation of home consoles and has invested such obscene amounts of money in their platform.

I know Game Pass is their main strategy these days, but until cloud gaming truly takes off, there's no better way to sell those subs than to get Xbox consoles into people's homes first. Considering Game Pass growth has reportedly stalled as well, it's safe to assume MS isn't happy with the way this gen is going at all.

@OldGamer999 It's not like the Uncharted 4 team hasn't done anything since then, as many of them were surely the same people as those working on Lost Legacy and then The Last of Us 2.

Looks promising if you ask me. Sure, it has that typical Team Ninja AA flavour, but that's easy to look past once you get into the gameplay. Few studios produce games that feel as good to play as Team Ninja's.

Kind of a stretch to call Lost Odyssey a franchise, no? It had a grand total of, ehm, one game. Released 16 years ago.

@Darylb88 I fear you have seriously unrealistic expectations if you think Nintendo can deliver hardware to rival the other platforms, keep it portable and still sell at a reasonable price. I still don't see why you would want that.

Nintendo has thrived since it abandoned the hardware power race, while they were suffering before that. Just let Nintendo be Nintendo, it's what they do best.

@Darylb88 Honestly, I think the absolute worst thing Nintendo could do is abandoning their current market position and going for competitive hardware power.

If they did that, they lose one of their biggest advantages over the others: price. There's no way they can compete on hardware and still maintain a lower price, and suddenly that changes everything.

@JokerBoy422 I never get statements like this. Playstation gamers aren't a hive mind. The ones who have always been claiming that Xbox have no good exclusives might not actually be the same ones now saying they'd play those games.

Or maybe they are, and then the only thing we've learned is that some people are (loud) idiots, which, you know, isn't exactly news. There aren't any sweeping conclusions to draw from this.

Getting bored of the rumours and speculation now. Microsoft needs to put out a clear statement, whatever the direction is going to be.

If they're there in a narrative context, that's fine.

@zekepliskin I agree we need a little caution with rumours like this, but it does feel like there's at least a grain of truth here. All gaming sites, major and minor, started reporting this stuff around the same time, and then there was Phil's twitter response that didn't exactly deny any of it, which gives it an air of legitimacy.

There's definitely something going on, we just don't know what yet.

@SgtTruth The fact you point to this as a "political" term tells me enough. It has nothing to do with politics. You could have chosen to condemn the people who deserve to be condemned, i.e. the people threatening others.

Instead, you have chosen to attack people who you perceive as abusing their position as victims, based on absolutely nothing. It only serves to muddy the waters and take potential victims less seriously. It's an irresponsible and damaging position to take.

@SgtTruth You were doing ok until the second part of that post, when you descended into what is essentially victim blaming.

You're talking about people that, due to the nature of their job, have a public presence and whose personal details are often up for grabs on the internet, who get dozens, hundreds or thousands of threats of violence or death against them and their families from others of whom they have no idea whether they are living close to them, or how mentally stable they are. You seriously want to suggest they don't take any of that seriously and "milk" it?

Yeah, I'm sure that isn't how you would act, because you have literally no clue what sort of effect that would have on you if you were in that situation.

@__jamiie People aren't considering it because it doesn't really seem to make much sense to either Sony or MS.

Sony, as the market leader, is under no pressure at all to allow stuff on their system that isn't in their best interest, i.e. Game Pass in any shape or form without getting a cut from MS. While for MS, it doesn't really make sense to share Game Pass revenue with anyone.

It would make more sense to continue pushing Game Pass on their own platforms (including PC, which at the end of the day is a MS platform) as the "preferred" (cheaper) way to play their games, while supplementing that with game sales on rival platforms. That also means rival platform holders get their 30% cut from game sales. It's just the scenario that makes the most sense for everyone involved.

It's all speculation at this point, we'll find out soon enough.

@__jamiie Sony is never going to allow Game Pass on Playstation without getting some sort of cut from MS, it's just not in their best interest.

@mikeawmids Ah yes, the problem is with the people who created a fictional character, not the the people who are sending death threats to an actor and her infant child.

Feels like a lot of people don't seem to realize there are actual human beings on the receiving end of all the abuse they're spewing on the internet. Or they realize the damage they're doing and don't care, which is even worse.

I found that part of the docu hard to watch without tearing up myself. No one should have to go through that.

@Rayman123 But why? Do you have shares in MS or Sony or something?

When I think about what I want from these companies, my first reaction is "I want them to make great games", not "I want them to make more profit".

Several commenters are pointing at Naughty Dog, but nothing in this rumour indicates they would be developing it. I know their recent track record doesn't point a great picture, but this would surely be a job for another studio. Naughty Dog hasn't suddenly become a remake factory.

@Rayman123 You don't care about Sony and Microsoft but at the same time, you want them to invest in mobile gaming so they can make more profit? How does that make sense?

I fail to see how them focusing on mobile gaming would bring any benefit to us as console gamers.

So it's just the colours and texts on those screenshots hinting at PS5 and Switch released? Or anything else? If they are legit, I guess it's a pretty good indication, but still, wait and see and all that.

I'd probably check it out, I like what I've seen of it. I could play on pc but it looks like a game I'd rather play from the comfort of my couch.

@Deljo I never removed it either, but sadly when I moved to PS5 I couldn't transfer it. The console doesn't support it.

@Deljo If you still have a PS4 with the game sitting on your hard drive, sure. Otherwise, you're out of luck, at least without looking for a workaround that involves methods of questionable legality.

I saw plenty of games I'm interested in, that's more than enough for me. Anyone expecting big new reveals in a State of Play in January was setting themselves up for disappointment. There will be a time and place for those, and this was never going to be it.

I appreciate the fact that they put this in a dedicated State of Play. They could've added it to this one, taking time away from the other games, which would've been a shame as we've seen so much of it already.

I'll probably skip it, not because I'm not interested, but because I know enough and want to see the rest for myself when I'm playing it.

Surprised no one has mentioned Sekiro. I can't be the only one who saw the obvious similarities in the combat? It even sounds like it!

I mean this as a positive by the way, still my favourite Souls-like combat, together with the Nioh games. So this is the perfect combination.

People should keep their expectations about first-party announcements well in check. This is a State of Play, not a Showcase. Traditionally, these just offer a look at bigger titles that were already announced, plus maybe some smaller new games.

@Coversnail That point about account bans is crucial. Under no circumstances, no matter how severe the infraction, should an account ban ever lead to losing access to your paid content. That is plain theft. I know you technically only pay for a licence and blah blah, it still amounts to theft.

There needs to be a legal framework for this sort of stuff.

I understand all the concerns about ownership, but I can't help it, digital is just so damn convenient. I'm pretty much the opposite of a collector, I don't like having a bunch of stuff around and the idea of a physical game collection taking up space doesn't appeal to me.

With year round digital sales and a patient mindset, it also doesn't really feel like I'd need to turn to physical to save money. I know some people would argue that we can't let physical media disappear, but at the end of the day I'm not going to go out of my way to make purchases that I consider less convenient to me personally.