Art_Vandelay

I wonder if photo mode coming late is a matter of prioritization of features within the studio or if it's actually a strategy to avoid people from spoiling the game left and right in the first few days after release. Sure, one can always take a simple screenshot, but photo mode provides a big incentive for people to post images of their gameplay.

And, of course, these updates do generate an uptick in marketing buzz and user engagement.

This looks pretty nice. Very atmospheric, which is great in VR.

It's mind boggling how people don't see the absolute relationship between this silence and the Activision deal. Sony is genuinely worried about the potential disastrous long-term impact of MS holding the COD keys. And how could it not? COD represents a sizeable share of PlayStation's yearly revenue.

A quick read through any of the documents that consumer defense authorities have published will make it abundantly clear that a PS Showcase is simply incompatible with Sony's claims.

Sure, announcements will be made, but the form matters just as much as the content. This line of thought completely explains the way major pieces of news such as PSVR2's release date and Silent Hill 2's existence were made in a totally atypical fashion.

@electrolite77 And btw, good conversation.

@electrolite77 " They haven’t done anything to dramatically alienate their fan base like Sega did." Lol mate, were you even around during the PS3 days? The "get a second job", PSN outage days?

But anyway, that's not even the point. The point is that Microsoft is elbowing their way into market dominance. It doesn't matter if it will be through streaming or whatever, these are distribution channels. What makes or breaks a games company are, well, the games. And COD is in such a league of its own in terms of staying power that it's almost funny.

You should really read the legal document that Sony filed and the UK government published. There are some staggering numbers. It's not even debatable how dangerous and destructive this deal would turn out to be.

At this point, I'm betting on regulators not allowing it to go through. And Sony looking "foolish" to the 0,1% of its fans who actually pay attention to this stuff will be totally worth it.

@electrolite77 I don't know how old you are, but I used to be a big Sega fan back in the eighties and nineties. Daytona USA arcade machines might be the most fun I've ever had with videogames. Now, Sega (or Atari, for that matter) are nothing but a shadow of their former selves. This fall from grace is nothing new in this industry and the absurd value MS is paying for Activision might give you a hint of how this could be seen as the culprit of Sony's demise in, like, 10 or 20 years.

@electrolite77 You should really read Peter Thiel's Zero to One to get a glimpse on how these tech companies operate. Winner takes all, buddy. Microsoft is clearly going for that killing blow with this deal.

Honestly, I don't think it will work because Microsoft is so incredibly incompetent in managing studios. But that is the goal and it could potentially happen. Don't be fooled by uncle Phill's horsesh*t.

I haven't got to Forbidden West yet, so I wonder if I could play Call of The Mountain first. You know, because of potential spoilers or, more importantly, context.

@TheCollector316 Precise words.

It's hilarious that we're still discussing whether or not this deal is a tide shifter that poses existential risks to PlayStation long-term.

People dismissing that claim have no idea on how tech companies like Microsoft operate.

@lindos
PS1 - 1994
PS2 - 2000
PS3 - 2006
PS4 - 2013
PS5 - 2020
6 years became 7 and should now become at least 8. And interestingly, even though the cycle is spreading, the generational jump is becoming less apparent.

@dschons Oh, the diversification is coming. I'm just not sure gamers will like what they hear.

To be fair though, I'm betting on PSVR2 to provide me with those desired fresh experiences. VR is where true experimentation has been happening in gaming to the point where it reminds me of the good old PS1 days. So, there you have it.

And to be fairer, I've been a single player gamer in a near exclusive capacity for about 40 years now, but GT7 has softened my stance on the potential of live service games.

@dschons "Only thing I ask of Sony is more genre variety."

Careful what you wish for...

People should no longer expect the cadence of the past when it comes to console generations. Microchips manufacturing have become increasingly more complex and thus pricier, to the point where this 8+year gap implied by the document makes a lot of sense. A shorter lifecycle would result in either an underpowered or overpriced product. Or both.

C'mon, Sony. PSVR2 support for this game is such an easy win.

GT7 is the obvious one. C'mon Sony, wake up.

Ace Combat would be amazing as well, but I'm not holding my breath on that one.

I will buy and support PSVR2 regardless, because VR is the single most exciting thing to happen to games since the shift to 3D back in the nineties.

@Gooseman42 I don't think you're part of the problem for preordering it. In fact, I strongly believe we're part of the solution. PSVR2 will only be a long-term success if people buy and support it. If it goes the way of the Vita with soft sales numbers, we will not gonna get the games past the initial months.

@cburg C'mon, mate. Sony clearly had their hand forced into this model. But even though, it's still a much more sustainable service than GP.

Again: Ragnarok. I'm on PS+ Extra and I didn't even blink before preordering it as soon as the reviews came out. Because I know I don't want to wait months or years to play this specific game.

Note, this is the same business model that used to provide us with several outstanding movies every year back in the nineties. Until Netflix broke it. We used to get The Lord of The Rings. Now we get The Rings of Power. And maybe a Top Gun every couple years.

Offering day one releases in an age where AAA games cost hundreds of millions of dollars is simply not sustainable. And in fact, Spencer has largely changed his tone regarding GP since Microsoft's latest earning report. Not sure if you've seen it. And I tell you why: GP needs a subscribers base in the hundreds of millions to be profitable, and MS has massively overestimated the service's growth rate.

Oh, and those developers' interviews: everyone's happy while their bellies are full. Microsoft was dumping money into the service's growth, but it sounds the tides might the turning already.

@cburg I'm afraid I have to agree with that sentiment. Game Pass is a cancer and needs to go away.
It surely is great for consumers in the short term, but it's already causing tectonic shifts that could negatively impact the industry long term.
You get what pay for, simple as that. And Ragnarok is a timely reminder of a business model that has worked great for gamers so far.

"[...] including not working at all for almost two years while still being paid by the studio".
Are these the guys that had a Stallin picture hanged on the studio's wall?
If it was, well... the writing was literally on the wall.

Does anyone know if it's possible to filter my game library so that I see only PSVR compatible games? Either through a web browser or the PS5 interface...
I recall claiming a bunch of PSVR games through PS+ even though I didn't own the previous headset.

@bpomber I'd go with "Favor performance" (target 60 fps). But you might like it differently, so I suggest watching Digital Foundry's review on Youtube.

@Bez87 Comparing PSVR2 with Quest2 in stand-alone is like comparing a PS5 with a PS2 and saying, "oh, the PS2 is much cheaper and does pretty much the same stuff".
C'mon, mate. You do need an expensive PC to play anything comparable to what PSVR2 offers.

@Bionic-Spencer I suffer a lot from motion sickness when playing first person games on a traditional screen but, interestingly enough, I haven't experienced that in VR. Worth a try, then.

@stvevan Sounds like you have never played Journey. Best $30/hour investment I have ever made.

@dimi Exactly, they do cost half, just not at launch. It's like deciding whether you want to watch a film at the movies or wait for it to come to streaming. Fair game.

@Shepherd_Tallon It turns out internet whiners are quite the hypocrites. The horror.

And that's the exact same model applied in GT7. Sure, there are MTX, but they are absolutely optional. That game offers so much content and is updated at such a regular basis, that one could easily play GT7 exclusively.
I, for one, have put close to 200 hours into it and I'm far from exploring and mastering everything it has to offer.
GT7 has opened my eyes to the potential of live service games and the fun in multiplayer, two things I loathed up until March 2022.

Just give me full VR support on GT7 and Ace Combat and I'm set for life.

I guess it fits NFS. Not for me, though.

@TheGreyandTheRed It's the little things that indicate the overall trajectory. This won't end well.

Since people here have been so negative, I'll speak out on the real issue with GT7: it has killed my enjoyment of other games.

@Finozzi1696 Exactly. That's what happens when pink haired writers try to "cater the game to a modern audience". That woke aesthetic is an instant turn off to a vast majority of people. Mark my words: GTA VI is next.

People that use Quest as a reference for predicting the price must understand that PSVR2 lacks the components that form the bulk of Quest's cost: SoC, RAM, storage and battery. Not to mention the built-in speakers.
Despite its advanced features, I would think that PSVR2 is cheaper to manufacture than Quest 2. It actually comes down to how much subsidy Sony is willing to grant, if at all, to push the device into the mainstream.
If this thing costs anywhere above $500, it's doomed from the outset. Sony knows that. I'm betting $400, but $300 would be a dream. I even think that that last number was the original plan, but covid and the bizarre lockdowns put an end to it.

The silent seller here has been GT7. This game was released back in March, and it's been quietly and consistently showing up in best-selling lists since then. Which I'm quite glad, since it's been dominating my gaming time this year.

Now, here's an idea: what about a VR experience based on the post-apocalyptic world of The Last of Us? That is arguably the most immersive game on traditional consoles, and there's an HBO show coming up. Sounds like a slam dunk to me.

Awesome. First person perspective is a deal breaker for me.
Firstly, because of motion sickness. But I could even endure past that if I didn't find FPSs largely unappealing. I always feel like I'm controlling a camera, not a character. Totally breaks the immersion for me. But of course, VR flips this head over heels, and I love it.

"given its market leading console position"
These responses are carefully engineered, so it's important to dissect the details and understand the implications. So, Microsoft is saying that, as long as it makes business sense, COD will remain on PlayStation because Sony's platform is too big.
The funny thing is that if this deal goes according to Microsoft's plan, Sony could no longer hold a "leading market position" in a few years. And thus it wouldn't make sense to support COD on PlayStation any longer. Full circle.
Microsoft is clearly trying to buy their way into dominance and I hope it blows spectacularly in their face.

@Somebody They're trying to buy as much time as possible to prepare for the worse, simple as that.

@PhantomMenace84 The controller only tracks hands, so the arms' placement and movement would have to be inferred by some combination of inverse kinematics and AI. The problem is that any slight dissonance between the game's arms and your actual arms can feel incredibly awkward and uncomfortable.
So, it's not impossible to achieve, but it's incredibly hard to do it perfectly. For now, at least. I'm sure they're figuring it out.

@AverageGamer Actually, there is a very good reason: a CGI trailer can easily be commissioned to an external studio, preserving valuable internal dev resources.

@MattSilverado Ooh, kindred spirits!
I started in the mid 80s with the Atari 2600, but really became obsessed with games when I got the longing Sega Master System in the early 90s. Also work as a computer programmer and also had the incredible Voodoo back in the day, followed by the TNT2 Ultra made by that startup NVidia. In fact, before those, I had owned the very first 3D accelerator called the Matrox Impression Plus as well as its successor, the Matrox Millennium.
But these days, I just don't have the bandwidth for PC gaming, you know... And that's why I'm so excited for PSVR2.

It has to be said: PSVR2's success in solely hinging on whether GT7 will fully support it or not.
"Success" meaning "day one purchase for me".
Jokes aside, GT7 and Alyx could be key to the device's adoption rate.

@MattSilverado That's exactly it. Right now, there's no tech that can meet all the requirements for mass consumer wireless VR over streaming: zero latency, 100% consistency and reliability, 4K bandwidth and last but not least, affordability.
Sure, Quest can do that, but the experience varies wildly according to one's wi-fi. Heck, it varies even in wired PC VR mode, according to one's USB adapter or cable.

@Perturbator People forget that PSVR2 doesn't require and most probably won't include the most expensive components of the Quest: SoC, memory and battery. Thus, I'm leaning towards a $300-400 launch price.
Sure, it has OLED, eye tracking and advanced haptics which Quest lacks. But that shouldn't make up for the aforementioned components.
At the end of the day, it really comes down to how much Meta and Sony are willing to subsidize their offerings, if at all.

@J2theEzzo You're right. Ragnarok will give us that. Fingers crossed.

@theMEGAniggle That is definitely why we're here. But what almost always happens is that people love to whine and pretend to hate the evil greedy corporation but when push comes to shove, they don't put their money where their mouth is. And hence that negativity for negativity's sake unnecessarily gets in the way of our enjoyment of this great form of entertainment.

@theMEGAniggle Again: good thing we (still) live in a free society where one can choose which forms of entertainment or which companies they support based on their assessment of whether that trade is fair or not. If it's not justifiable and you are still consuming their products, then I guess it's not the company's fault. Right?

@theMEGAniggle Good thing capitalism works for all of us, right? We give 'em money, they keep us entertained. Fair trade.

@J2theEzzo Dude, that last trial in Muspelheim where you have to kill something like 70 enemies in a short period of time is certainly one of the greatest moments of my decades long gaming life. Combat has never felt so good.

@Juanalf This trend is additive, not substitutive. Sony is simply aiming at those PC players that would never game on consoles. Just like there are millions of gamers like myself who would never game on PCs (been there, done that, not going back).
Saying in 2022 that PCs will eventually replace consoles sounds a lot like saying in 2012 that mobile gaming would eventually take over. You know, the tiring "this is the last console generation" mantra.