As a Playstation gamer, I guess this is all good news - though most Microsoft titles don't really interest me. But I wonder about Microsoft's strategy here - flooding the Playstation market with so many titles in such a relatively short time frame, aren't they going to cannibalise their own sales? I know they've been relatively successful so far, but now the novelty of playing Xbox games on Sony's machine has worn off, I wonder if some of these games are just going to sell a lot more softly.
Comments section full of dinosaurs! Sold all my physical media years ago, never regretted it. So many new games to play, no need to hold onto the past. Declutter your lives, people, you really don't need all that stuff to be happy.
Many years ago, my parents rented their TV and VCR, and it used to be common for people to rent other electronics as well. This all died out with rising average wages and generally cheaper consumer goods making it less and less necessary.
So, I doubt there will be a huge market for this scheme, but I can see various use cases - e.g. rent a PS5 for 6 months, play all the games you want and then give it back. But as a long-term proposition, I'm not sure many will want to overpay like this.
Still, I'm one of those people who quite likes the Ubisoft formula (Far Cry and Assassin's Creed). I don't want all games to be like this, but they are the gaming equivalent of fast food - a quick sugar rush from completing each activity on the map etc. isn't always a bad thing. They're usually very slick and with solid mechanics, and nothing too challenging or complicated ... in between more demanding games, I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
I was commenting on the hyperbole - it's only a video game, for goodness' sake! To describe its inclusion on PS Plus as 'insane' or 'shocking' is ridiculous. Now, the meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy, that was insane and shocking...
Think you missed my point. I was simply highlighting how people suddenly seem to change their tune when a game becomes 'free' on PS Plus, just because it's AAA. Everyone hates on the service when they give out highly rated, but smaller games, and is constantly clamouring for bigger titles. So when they do add a AAA title, people just seem inordinately grateful, regardless of the quality. But, as I said, being free doesn't change a game's quality - and in this case, it simply isn't a very good game (whatever Metacritic says; don't let some meaningless average dictate your opinions for you.)
Calling this lineup 'insane' and 'shocking' is pretty crazy itself - unless you have a very low bar for being shocked, I suppose.
And funny how happy everyone seems to be about getting a game so few people were willing actually to pay for and which has been roundly criticised all over the Internet. A rubbish game is still rubbish regardless of whether or not it's 'free'.
Games are - taking into account inflation - cheaper today than they were in the 80s and 90s. No one likes paying £70/$70 for new games, but if you want big AAA games to be made then you need to be willing to pay for them. If not, just buy all the super-cheap indies you can also get on the PS store; or, much older AAA games.
Moreover, if you somehow force big developers to charge lower upfront prices, all this means is that there will be more egregious and in-your-face microtransactions.
Permanently online whingers on social media think it sucks, but I'd guess that most ordinary gamers are more than happy - witness PS5's incredible sales figures. Most people don't know/don't care about, say, the implosion of Sony's live service strategy or lack of first party games that social media nerds obsess about, they're just happy to get on with playing the 100s of games that are available (first, second or third party).
First, the price of PS+ is irrelevant – this stays the same whether I bought a Pro or not, just as the money I spend on any games does.
Second, if I follow your logic, then it still works out very well. On your way of looking at things, I got four years of PS5 gaming for £150, which is a pretty good deal. And when the PS6 comes out, and I sell my Pro (let’s say, for £400), then I will have had three/four years of PS5 Pro gaming for £300, which is also pretty good. And so on into the future.
Third, though, I just don’t agree with your basic argument. When I buy a new car and trade in my old one to get money off, no one says, well, actually, you just got money off the price of your original car, not the new one. This is effectively what I did with my base PS5 (even if I had to use ebay, rather than Sony directly giving me the money as a discount). And as I established in point 2, if I keep doing this every generation – which I also did with previous PS generations – then I think it’s fair to treat this in the colloquial way of saying that I got money off the new one.
Anyway, whichever way you look at it, I’m very happy with my Pro, and enjoying all its benefits.
It's not about graphics being 'clearer' - it's about the higher frame rates. If I can play more games at 60fps (maybe even 120fps) over 30fps, then it's definitely worth it.
As for price, yes, it's expensive, but I sold my base model for £300 on Ebay, knocking it down considerably. When PS6 comes out, I'll sell the Pro and recoup even more of the cost. It's the circle of (console) life!
I'm sure this is all very meaningful to someone, but I'm struggling to care ... The only question that matters is: is a game good or not? What difference does it make to your enjoyment if Sony calls it first, second or third party?
How many more articles are you going to produce from trawling through this one interview? Also, I know you give the link to the podcast, but if it's worth four articles (so far), you could explicitly credit Colin Moriarty for the interview.
In 2026, the Playstation 6 will probably be only a year or two away from being released, and yet there are people on here still expecting Sony to be supporting the PS4? If it isn't already, the PS4 will basically be a legacy console by then.
Honestly, the PS5 will be over five years old by then. A base PS5 really isn't that expensive - you can grab one used for under £200/$200, and sell your old PS4 for a few pounds/dollars as well - so there really isn't any reason not to have upgraded by now.
I have no interest in GTA 6 personally, but to all the people expressing shock and horror at $100, do you not live in the real world? In 2025, how much do you think $100 is actually worth? A family meal at a restaurant or trip to the cinema and you won't be getting much change from this, I can tell you. Realistically, it's a pretty fair price for a game that will give you 100s of hours of entertainment - what else can you buy for $100 that will give you that?
My wife's parents were of a generation that always used to fully turn off and unplug their TV, video etc. at night - I'm talking up until 5-10 years ago - which I always found hilariously old-fashioned. So who are these crazy people who fully shut down a games console in 2025 - time travellers from the 1950s? I can't even remember the last time I fully switched off my PS5.
From what Hulst says in the interview, you may as well say 'Sony doubles down on single player games.' The fact is that they are going to continue making both single-player and live-service games ... and why not? I have zero interest in live-service games, but if they help keep playstation profitable - and therefore able to continue making high-quality single-player games - then carry on milking those people willing to pay $20 for a piece of cosmetic dlc, etc.
Just a couple of points: 1. It's pretty common for multiplayer games to have short campaigns - just look at COD - so the fact that Killzone's may have been only 10 hours long is not uncommon, and doesn't mean it wasn't AAA. 2. For the rest, it feels like you are shooting the messenger. I would love it if Sony experimented more with smaller and more unusual titles - but those days are (like it or not) long gone. Today's Sony is pretty much only interested in making big budget AAA games which sell millions of copies - which is why people need to accept that most of these dormant franchises are probably not coming back, at least not from its own first-party studios.
Sure, but it's 2024, not 2004. If you want smaller games, there are plenty of indies out there - which I often play, too - just don't expect Sony (or Microsoft) to make them themselves.
None of this answers the question of why these dormant franchises went dormant - which is, fundamentally, that they weren't selling!
To pick up on Killzone - this was a AAA, first-party franchise (touted by some as a 'Halo Killer', so of course it was expected to sell well; it wasn't some tiny indie game. No need to throw around ridiculous figures like 100 million units, let's just compare to, as you mention, Horizon. Zero Dawn has sold just over 24 million units - ten times what Killzone games used to sell.
As such, it's no surprise at all that Sony has no real interest in reviving it, and the same goes for many of its other past games. Personally, I used to like games like, say, Sly Cooper, and every so often a remaster - or even a lower budget sequel - might pop out (either by Sony or whoever). But the truth remains that these sorts of games don't sell very well today (unless you're Nintendo), so anyone expecting big revivals (other than remasters) for most old Sony IPs will probably be waiting a very long time.
Let's be honest, although nostalgists on the Internet are constantly clamouring for reviving these old franchises, the fundamental reason Sony stopped making most of them is that they just didn't sell very well. Take Killzone: a quick google shows that none of the six Killzone titles sold over 3 million copies, most considerably fewer.
And while Astrobot is a really nice 'throwback' title, part of the reason it did so well is the novelty - if we were suddenly to get a glut of platformers again a la the PS1-PS3 days, I'd bet most would sink without a trace.
The truth is, most of the time it's best to leave nostalgia in the past. I'd much rather time and effort went into developing newer games, not just rehashing older games I've already played.
A small sample of either full or timed PS console exclusives from 2nd and 3rd parties for 2024: Stellar Blade, Black Myth, Helldivers 2, Silent Hill 2, Rise of the Ronin, Pacific Drive etc. etc.
Some of these have/will also come to PC - just like Final Fantasy games - but it's pretty clear that plenty of non-Sony studios are more than happy to sign deals with Sony to produce timed or full exclusives for them.
This analysis simply doesn't understand that Nintendo isn't really a direct competitor to Sony and Microsoft anymore - the Switch exists in its own, separate bubble that doesn't attempt to be the most powerful console in the world. As such, while I might agree that there isn't room for three high-powered consoles, there IS room for two of these plus the Switch. Like many households I would guess, I own one of the two 'big boys' (a PS5) AND a Switch, and see them as very different machines.
Even with the more powerful Switch 2, I don't think the badic equation will change - the next Playstation and Xbox will still be more powerful and cater to different use cases and types of games.
This said, it's not impossible that Microsoft will exit the console manufacturing space in the next 5-10 years (after the next, possibly last Xbox). But if it does, I wonder if some other company might come into fill the gap?
The amount of moaning and whining in the comments here is becoming almost unbearable.
If people really feel this negatively, then either a) switch to PC, and let's see you build a similarly specced machine as the Pro for the same price, or b) just swap to a different hobby, videogames don't seem to be giving you much pleasure any more.
Either way, the Playstation community would be a better place without all the cry-babies.
Anyway, personally, can't wait for the Pro to arrive next week ... you know, because gaming is meant to be fun, and you should be happy about it!
'Sales never = greatness' Well, that's just not true - plenty of great games sell well, including Playstation games like the Last of Us, Uncharted, God of War, Ghost of Tsushima, Spiderman and, yes, Horizon.
And sales numbers clearly indicate, I'm afraid, that the majority don't agree with you - the audience for Killzone was always relatively small, it's only a vocal minority who keep asking for it to be brought back. But what matters to games developers is not what people ask for on the Internet, but what they are actually willing to open their wallets for to buy - which (again) clearly isn't Killzone games.
Yes, but very few people seem to agree with you. Consider: no Killzone game ever sold more than 3 million copies (most sold closer to 2 million). By contrast, Horizon Zero Dawn has sold over 24 million copies. Why on earth would Guerilla swap back to a franchise that sells about 90% less?
I always find it funny how, in hindsight, even the most mediocre games can become in the eyes of nostalgists a beloved series. Let's be real here, Killzone was always a second, maybe third, tier franchise, never among the elite of FPS games. They never sold that well, or reviewed particularly highly. This is why they stopped making them in the first place!
If everyone who now says they would love to see Killzone return had bought them originally, then the series would still be going. But, of course, this all simply rose-tinted nostalgia talking.
So, no, Sony shouldn't try and resurrect a dead horse. Make something new (and good!) instead.
Think you missed the point of my comment, mate (!). It's a simple fact that console gaming is heading the same way as PC gaming - all your stuff about Windows etc. is, I'm afraid, irrelevant - whether you or I like it or not. Keep all your old hardware as long as you want, fine if that's what you want tobdo, but it doesn't change the fact that future gaming is increasingly moving in an all digital direction.
By way of comparison, I'm old enough to have some nostalgia for the days of going to Blockbusters on a Friday night to rent a movie, for example, but the past is the past, it isn't coming back. Again, like it or not, the future of TV and films is Netflix, Disney+ etc. not physical discs, and the future of gaming is the same.
Look, I still buy physical discs sometimes, alongside digital, but come on guys, you're fighting a losing battle here. The fact that so many people on here keep citing the used disc market - which simply reinforces the point that fewer people are buying discs new, the only purchase that matters (obviously) to games companies - merely shows how weak the arguments for physical have become.
PC went all digital years ago, PS6 and the next Xbox are almost certainly not going to have disc drives included, and the games market itself is clearly headed in an all digital direction. You can moan and whine all you want, but you're not any different to the people who cried over the closing of Blockbusters et al. Whatever the advantages/disadvantages may be, DVDs, Blu Rays and physical games are all going the way of the dinosaurs - come back here in, say, 10 years' time and you'll see how quaint your arguments sound then.
Huh, why should I listen to someone who actually makes games? All the real experts are surely the loudmouth-moaners-who-haven't-even-see-the-PS5-Pro-in-real-life on Twitter, who confidently tell me it is unnecessary, offers no real benefits and no one actually wants it. They're the ones whose views we need to listen to!
In fact, I'm going to cancel my preorder right now!
What difference, truly, will this make? The law may require digital storefronts to be clearer that you are purchasing a license and that you don't actually own a game ... but you will still be purchasing a license and not actually own it. Big whoop!
Most of us on here are probably well aware of this already, but even if you aren't, it's highly unlikely that this law will change either consumer or companies' behaviour. With consumers, the direction of travel has been clear for a long time now - most people simply prefer digital over physical, the numbers very clearly show this. I mean, are PC gamers suddenly going to abandon Steam, Epic etc. and go back to discs? Obviously not, and this is almost certainly the future of console gaming as well.
And what exactly are we expecting companies to do differently either? Stop selling you a license and instead sell you ... what? No company would be foolish enough to claim that a digital purchase means a 100% guarantee that you will always and forever be able to access it (as you might with a physical copy), so why on earth would they put themselves in the legally treacherous position of saying that, yes, you do 'own' it?
Frankly, this is just another law that may sound good on paper, but which will have little material impact.
To everyone banging on about scalpers: yes, of course, this happens - I saw one 30th edn bundle on Ebay at £9999! - but this is a vastly overblown idea. It was the same with the original PS5, when it turned out the vast majority were bought by 'real' consumers.
This is all about people wanting to downplay the fact that the Pro model is just more popular than they want to admit - the whole 'nobody actually wants the PS5 Pro' brigade. It's a niche product, of course, but many of us definitely do want it - and I'm glad I got in my preorder!
Don't fat shame the original PS5!
Anyway, we've wandered far away from the original topic I think. But the one point I would make is that I just don't agree with the narrative that the PS5 doesn't have enough games worth playing. Sure, we'd all like more first party games, but there are plenty of second and third party games that either aren't on PS4 (Stellar Blade, Alan Wake 2, Baldur's Gate 3, Final Fantasy 16 etc.) or play much worse (hello, Cyberpunk!). At any rate, I've been playing mine solidly (and happily) since I got it day one. Roll on PS5 Pro!
Ok, though that's still over twice as slow. Look, I have no problem with people spending their money how they want - but in 2024, it seems a bit odd to be recommending spending money on an upgrade for a PS4 Pro (which only a small % of PS4 players have to begin with), when there's a much more powerful option out there. As I said earlier, save your pennies - and get yourself a cheap used PS5 instead, maybe (especially once the PS5 Pro drops and more used base models will probably enter the market)
But you're happy with 2 minute loading times versus 10 seconds? Not to mention lower frame rates, pop in etc. (check out the full digital foundry review for more).
Some people seem to have this idea that PS5 games are just slightly prettier versions of PS4 ones, but there's a whole host of performance improvements you get as well. Which is why, if you can afford it, you'd be much better off getting the PS5 version.
Which was my point precisely. Use it to play older games for a fraction of their original cost ... but if you can afford to buy newer games at full price, I'd say you are much better off upgrading to PS5 than sticking with PS4 for subpar versions of current gen games
Honestly, people still playing on ancient last gen hardware surely don't buy new, full price titles? At this point, I assumed that these machines are just used to play cheap, older games? I mean, if you can afford new games like this surely you'd just save your pennies and get a PS5?
'... I think we just have different models of console in the same eco-system that have different performance levels but no longer gate content behind a new piece of hardware.'
I mean, not really. Sure, there are more cross-gen titles today, but PS5 still 'gates' plenty of content from the PS4 - whether first or second party games like Spiderman 2, Returnal, Helldivers 2 etc., or third-party ones like Alan Wake 2 or Baldur's Gate 3. And this will only increase over the next few years. It will probably be the same with PS6 - to begin with, quite a few cross-gen games, but there will still be PS6 games you can't play on your PS5, which will grow in number over time. As long as there are consoles, there will likely still be generations and games 'exclusive' to each. Otherwise, new consoles would only ever be 'Pro' versions of preceeding ones, which manufacturers like Sony are well aware sell a small fraction of 'proper' upgrades.
If you're in the UK, you can get one on EE for £88.18 - it's on at £97.99, but they have a 10% discount code (on the website) for some gaming items at the moment. I just ordered one at this price because, yes, I will definitely be getting a Pro
Comments 88
Re: Xbox Has 'a Lot More' PS5 Ports to Come in 2025
As a Playstation gamer, I guess this is all good news - though most Microsoft titles don't really interest me. But I wonder about Microsoft's strategy here - flooding the Playstation market with so many titles in such a relatively short time frame, aren't they going to cannibalise their own sales? I know they've been relatively successful so far, but now the novelty of playing Xbox games on Sony's machine has worn off, I wonder if some of these games are just going to sell a lot more softly.
Re: Xbox Has 'a Lot More' PS5 Ports to Come in 2025
@SMJ
Lego Horizon Adventures?
Re: Disc Rot Already Afflicts Your Physical Game Collection
Comments section full of dinosaurs! Sold all my physical media years ago, never regretted it. So many new games to play, no need to hold onto the past. Declutter your lives, people, you really don't need all that stuff to be happy.
Re: Sony Expands Its PS5 Console Rental Service to the UK
Many years ago, my parents rented their TV and VCR, and it used to be common for people to rent other electronics as well. This all died out with rising average wages and generally cheaper consumer goods making it less and less necessary.
So, I doubt there will be a huge market for this scheme, but I can see various use cases - e.g. rent a PS5 for 6 months, play all the games you want and then give it back. But as a long-term proposition, I'm not sure many will want to overpay like this.
Re: Rumour: Far Cry Multiplayer Shooter Has Been 'Rebooted' as Ubisoft Turmoil Continues
@themightyant
Ok, ok, I was being pernickety!
Still, I'm one of those people who quite likes the Ubisoft formula (Far Cry and Assassin's Creed). I don't want all games to be like this, but they are the gaming equivalent of fast food - a quick sugar rush from completing each activity on the map etc. isn't always a bad thing. They're usually very slick and with solid mechanics, and nothing too challenging or complicated ... in between more demanding games, I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
Re: Rumour: Far Cry Multiplayer Shooter Has Been 'Rebooted' as Ubisoft Turmoil Continues
@jberg
That's still only six. And to be fair, Blood Dragon and Primal are somewhat different to the mainline entries.
Re: Rumour: Far Cry Multiplayer Shooter Has Been 'Rebooted' as Ubisoft Turmoil Continues
@themightyant
Well, there have only been three games since Far Cry 3, so how can there be SEVEN games the same?
Re: PS Plus Essential Games for March 2025 Include Some Massive Names
I was commenting on the hyperbole - it's only a video game, for goodness' sake! To describe its inclusion on PS Plus as 'insane' or 'shocking' is ridiculous. Now, the meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy, that was insane and shocking...
Re: PS Plus Essential PS5, PS4 Games for March 2025 Announced
@Th3solution
Think you missed my point. I was simply highlighting how people suddenly seem to change their tune when a game becomes 'free' on PS Plus, just because it's AAA. Everyone hates on the service when they give out highly rated, but smaller games, and is constantly clamouring for bigger titles. So when they do add a AAA title, people just seem inordinately grateful, regardless of the quality. But, as I said, being free doesn't change a game's quality - and in this case, it simply isn't a very good game (whatever Metacritic says; don't let some meaningless average dictate your opinions for you.)
Re: PS Plus Essential PS5, PS4 Games for March 2025 Announced
Calling this lineup 'insane' and 'shocking' is pretty crazy itself - unless you have a very low bar for being shocked, I suppose.
And funny how happy everyone seems to be about getting a game so few people were willing actually to pay for and which has been roundly criticised all over the Internet. A rubbish game is still rubbish regardless of whether or not it's 'free'.
Re: PS5 Maker Faces Lawsuit Over So-Called 'Sony Tax' on Digital Games
Games are - taking into account inflation - cheaper today than they were in the 80s and 90s. No one likes paying £70/$70 for new games, but if you want big AAA games to be made then you need to be willing to pay for them. If not, just buy all the super-cheap indies you can also get on the PS store; or, much older AAA games.
Moreover, if you somehow force big developers to charge lower upfront prices, all this means is that there will be more egregious and in-your-face microtransactions.
Re: Sony Is Now the Second Largest Company in Japan by Market Cap
@Drago201
Permanently online whingers on social media think it sucks, but I'd guess that most ordinary gamers are more than happy - witness PS5's incredible sales figures. Most people don't know/don't care about, say, the implosion of Sony's live service strategy or lack of first party games that social media nerds obsess about, they're just happy to get on with playing the 100s of games that are available (first, second or third party).
Re: Sony's Pricey PS5 Pro Is Now Being Outpaced by PS4 Pro Launch Aligned in the US
@Matroska
First, the price of PS+ is irrelevant – this stays the same whether I bought a Pro or not, just as the money I spend on any games does.
Second, if I follow your logic, then it still works out very well. On your way of looking at things, I got four years of PS5 gaming for £150, which is a pretty good deal. And when the PS6 comes out, and I sell my Pro (let’s say, for £400), then I will have had three/four years of PS5 Pro gaming for £300, which is also pretty good. And so on into the future.
Third, though, I just don’t agree with your basic argument. When I buy a new car and trade in my old one to get money off, no one says, well, actually, you just got money off the price of your original car, not the new one. This is effectively what I did with my base PS5 (even if I had to use ebay, rather than Sony directly giving me the money as a discount). And as I established in point 2, if I keep doing this every generation – which I also did with previous PS generations – then I think it’s fair to treat this in the colloquial way of saying that I got money off the new one.
Anyway, whichever way you look at it, I’m very happy with my Pro, and enjoying all its benefits.
Re: Sony's Pricey PS5 Pro Is Now Being Outpaced by PS4 Pro Launch Aligned in the US
@LifeGirl
It's not about graphics being 'clearer' - it's about the higher frame rates. If I can play more games at 60fps (maybe even 120fps) over 30fps, then it's definitely worth it.
As for price, yes, it's expensive, but I sold my base model for £300 on Ebay, knocking it down considerably. When PS6 comes out, I'll sell the Pro and recoup even more of the cost. It's the circle of (console) life!
Re: Sony Clarifies the Difference Between First-Party, Second-Party, and So On
I'm sure this is all very meaningful to someone, but I'm struggling to care ... The only question that matters is: is a game good or not? What difference does it make to your enjoyment if Sony calls it first, second or third party?
Re: Ex-Sony Exec Says PC Ports of Old PS5 Games Are Almost Like Printing Money
How many more articles are you going to produce from trawling through this one interview? Also, I know you give the link to the podcast, but if it's worth four articles (so far), you could explicitly credit Colin Moriarty for the interview.
Re: Sony to Mostly Drop PS4 Games from PS Plus Starting January 2026
In 2026, the Playstation 6 will probably be only a year or two away from being released, and yet there are people on here still expecting Sony to be supporting the PS4? If it isn't already, the PS4 will basically be a legacy console by then.
Honestly, the PS5 will be over five years old by then. A base PS5 really isn't that expensive - you can grab one used for under £200/$200, and sell your old PS4 for a few pounds/dollars as well - so there really isn't any reason not to have upgraded by now.
Re: Would You Pay $100 for GTA 6?
I have no interest in GTA 6 personally, but to all the people expressing shock and horror at $100, do you not live in the real world? In 2025, how much do you think $100 is actually worth? A family meal at a restaurant or trip to the cinema and you won't be getting much change from this, I can tell you. Realistically, it's a pretty fair price for a game that will give you 100s of hours of entertainment - what else can you buy for $100 that will give you that?
Re: Rumour: Gears of War, Hellblade 2 Both Set for PS5 This Year
They better all be PS5 Pro enhanced - can't wait for Playstation to be the best console to play Microsoft games!
Re: Rumour: Gears of War, Hellblade 2 Both Set for PS5 This Year
@Slippship
It'll be a cold day in hell before Sony puts its flagship games on Xbox
Re: Do You Put Your PS5 in Rest Mode or Shut It Down?
My wife's parents were of a generation that always used to fully turn off and unplug their TV, video etc. at night - I'm talking up until 5-10 years ago - which I always found hilariously old-fashioned. So who are these crazy people who fully shut down a games console in 2025 - time travellers from the 1950s? I can't even remember the last time I fully switched off my PS5.
Re: Unfazed by Concord, Sony Doubles Down on Exploring Service Games
From what Hulst says in the interview, you may as well say 'Sony doubles down on single player games.' The fact is that they are going to continue making both single-player and live-service games ... and why not? I have zero interest in live-service games, but if they help keep playstation profitable - and therefore able to continue making high-quality single-player games - then carry on milking those people willing to pay $20 for a piece of cosmetic dlc, etc.
Re: Sony Promises It Hasn't Abandoned the Famous Franchises from Its Past
@yohn777
Just a couple of points:
1. It's pretty common for multiplayer games to have short campaigns - just look at COD - so the fact that Killzone's may have been only 10 hours long is not uncommon, and doesn't mean it wasn't AAA.
2. For the rest, it feels like you are shooting the messenger. I would love it if Sony experimented more with smaller and more unusual titles - but those days are (like it or not) long gone. Today's Sony is pretty much only interested in making big budget AAA games which sell millions of copies - which is why people need to accept that most of these dormant franchises are probably not coming back, at least not from its own first-party studios.
Re: Sony Promises It Hasn't Abandoned the Famous Franchises from Its Past
@DiggleDog
Sure, but it's 2024, not 2004. If you want smaller games, there are plenty of indies out there - which I often play, too - just don't expect Sony (or Microsoft) to make them themselves.
Re: Sony Promises It Hasn't Abandoned the Famous Franchises from Its Past
@yohn777
None of this answers the question of why these dormant franchises went dormant - which is, fundamentally, that they weren't selling!
To pick up on Killzone - this was a AAA, first-party franchise (touted by some as a 'Halo Killer', so of course it was expected to sell well; it wasn't some tiny indie game. No need to throw around ridiculous figures like 100 million units, let's just compare to, as you mention, Horizon. Zero Dawn has sold just over 24 million units - ten times what Killzone games used to sell.
As such, it's no surprise at all that Sony has no real interest in reviving it, and the same goes for many of its other past games. Personally, I used to like games like, say, Sly Cooper, and every so often a remaster - or even a lower budget sequel - might pop out (either by Sony or whoever). But the truth remains that these sorts of games don't sell very well today (unless you're Nintendo), so anyone expecting big revivals (other than remasters) for most old Sony IPs will probably be waiting a very long time.
Re: Sony Promises It Hasn't Abandoned the Famous Franchises from Its Past
Let's be honest, although nostalgists on the Internet are constantly clamouring for reviving these old franchises, the fundamental reason Sony stopped making most of them is that they just didn't sell very well. Take Killzone: a quick google shows that none of the six Killzone titles sold over 3 million copies, most considerably fewer.
And while Astrobot is a really nice 'throwback' title, part of the reason it did so well is the novelty - if we were suddenly to get a glut of platformers again a la the PS1-PS3 days, I'd bet most would sink without a trace.
The truth is, most of the time it's best to leave nostalgia in the past. I'd much rather time and effort went into developing newer games, not just rehashing older games I've already played.
Re: Square Enix Insists Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth Hasn't Been the PS5 Sales Disaster It's Been Painted As
@ED_209
A small sample of either full or timed PS console exclusives from 2nd and 3rd parties for 2024: Stellar Blade, Black Myth, Helldivers 2, Silent Hill 2, Rise of the Ronin, Pacific Drive etc. etc.
Some of these have/will also come to PC - just like Final Fantasy games - but it's pretty clear that plenty of non-Sony studios are more than happy to sign deals with Sony to produce timed or full exclusives for them.
Re: Industry Analyst Argues Either Sony or Microsoft Will Need to Exit the Console Market
This analysis simply doesn't understand that Nintendo isn't really a direct competitor to Sony and Microsoft anymore - the Switch exists in its own, separate bubble that doesn't attempt to be the most powerful console in the world. As such, while I might agree that there isn't room for three high-powered consoles, there IS room for two of these plus the Switch. Like many households I would guess, I own one of the two 'big boys' (a PS5) AND a Switch, and see them as very different machines.
Even with the more powerful Switch 2, I don't think the badic equation will change - the next Playstation and Xbox will still be more powerful and cater to different use cases and types of games.
This said, it's not impossible that Microsoft will exit the console manufacturing space in the next 5-10 years (after the next, possibly last Xbox). But if it does, I wonder if some other company might come into fill the gap?
Re: Archetype's Sci-fi Epic Exodus Looks Sick in PS5 Gameplay
It 'looks sick' ... what is this, the 1980s? Is it rad and wicked as well?
Re: PS5 Pro was a '5-Year Project', In Development Before PS5's Launch
The amount of moaning and whining in the comments here is becoming almost unbearable.
If people really feel this negatively, then either a) switch to PC, and let's see you build a similarly specced machine as the Pro for the same price, or b) just swap to a different hobby, videogames don't seem to be giving you much pleasure any more.
Either way, the Playstation community would be a better place without all the cry-babies.
Anyway, personally, can't wait for the Pro to arrive next week ... you know, because gaming is meant to be fun, and you should be happy about it!
Re: PS5, PS4 Fans Are Worried Cash Rewards Have Been Removed from PS Stars
Maybe Sony have finally caught on to the infinite rewards points glitch/exploit?
Re: Sony's Guerrilla Sounds Completely Done with the Killzone Series
@tinCAT-zero
But that's not what you said ... read your own comment?
Re: Sony's Guerrilla Sounds Completely Done with the Killzone Series
@Gewertzx
And?
Re: Sony's Guerrilla Sounds Completely Done with the Killzone Series
@tinCAT-zero
'Sales never = greatness'
Well, that's just not true - plenty of great games sell well, including Playstation games like the Last of Us, Uncharted, God of War, Ghost of Tsushima, Spiderman and, yes, Horizon.
And sales numbers clearly indicate, I'm afraid, that the majority don't agree with you - the audience for Killzone was always relatively small, it's only a vocal minority who keep asking for it to be brought back. But what matters to games developers is not what people ask for on the Internet, but what they are actually willing to open their wallets for to buy - which (again) clearly isn't Killzone games.
Re: Sony's Guerrilla Sounds Completely Done with the Killzone Series
@tinCAT-zero
Yes, but very few people seem to agree with you. Consider: no Killzone game ever sold more than 3 million copies (most sold closer to 2 million). By contrast, Horizon Zero Dawn has sold over 24 million copies. Why on earth would Guerilla swap back to a franchise that sells about 90% less?
Re: Sony's Guerrilla Sounds Completely Done with the Killzone Series
I always find it funny how, in hindsight, even the most mediocre games can become in the eyes of nostalgists a beloved series. Let's be real here, Killzone was always a second, maybe third, tier franchise, never among the elite of FPS games. They never sold that well, or reviewed particularly highly. This is why they stopped making them in the first place!
If everyone who now says they would love to see Killzone return had bought them originally, then the series would still be going. But, of course, this all simply rose-tinted nostalgia talking.
So, no, Sony shouldn't try and resurrect a dead horse. Make something new (and good!) instead.
Re: Like It or Not, This Is Why PS5 Pro Doesn't Have a Disc Drive
@Vaako007
Think you missed the point of my comment, mate (!). It's a simple fact that console gaming is heading the same way as PC gaming - all your stuff about Windows etc. is, I'm afraid, irrelevant - whether you or I like it or not. Keep all your old hardware as long as you want, fine if that's what you want tobdo, but it doesn't change the fact that future gaming is increasingly moving in an all digital direction.
By way of comparison, I'm old enough to have some nostalgia for the days of going to Blockbusters on a Friday night to rent a movie, for example, but the past is the past, it isn't coming back. Again, like it or not, the future of TV and films is Netflix, Disney+ etc. not physical discs, and the future of gaming is the same.
Re: Like It or Not, This Is Why PS5 Pro Doesn't Have a Disc Drive
Look, I still buy physical discs sometimes, alongside digital, but come on guys, you're fighting a losing battle here. The fact that so many people on here keep citing the used disc market - which simply reinforces the point that fewer people are buying discs new, the only purchase that matters (obviously) to games companies - merely shows how weak the arguments for physical have become.
PC went all digital years ago, PS6 and the next Xbox are almost certainly not going to have disc drives included, and the games market itself is clearly headed in an all digital direction. You can moan and whine all you want, but you're not any different to the people who cried over the closing of Blockbusters et al. Whatever the advantages/disadvantages may be, DVDs, Blu Rays and physical games are all going the way of the dinosaurs - come back here in, say, 10 years' time and you'll see how quaint your arguments sound then.
Re: PS5 Pro 'Absolutely Rocks', According to No Man's Sky Engine Programmer
Huh, why should I listen to someone who actually makes games? All the real experts are surely the loudmouth-moaners-who-haven't-even-see-the-PS5-Pro-in-real-life on Twitter, who confidently tell me it is unnecessary, offers no real benefits and no one actually wants it. They're the ones whose views we need to listen to!
In fact, I'm going to cancel my preorder right now!
Re: Newly Signed Law May Restrict Sony's Use of Terms Like 'Buy' or 'Purchase' for Digital Games
What difference, truly, will this make? The law may require digital storefronts to be clearer that you are purchasing a license and that you don't actually own a game ... but you will still be purchasing a license and not actually own it. Big whoop!
Most of us on here are probably well aware of this already, but even if you aren't, it's highly unlikely that this law will change either consumer or companies' behaviour. With consumers, the direction of travel has been clear for a long time now - most people simply prefer digital over physical, the numbers very clearly show this. I mean, are PC gamers suddenly going to abandon Steam, Epic etc. and go back to discs? Obviously not, and this is almost certainly the future of console gaming as well.
And what exactly are we expecting companies to do differently either? Stop selling you a license and instead sell you ... what? No company would be foolish enough to claim that a digital purchase means a 100% guarantee that you will always and forever be able to access it (as you might with a physical copy), so why on earth would they put themselves in the legally treacherous position of saying that, yes, you do 'own' it?
Frankly, this is just another law that may sound good on paper, but which will have little material impact.
Re: In the UK, PS5 Pro Has Already Completely Sold Out
To everyone banging on about scalpers: yes, of course, this happens - I saw one 30th edn bundle on Ebay at £9999! - but this is a vastly overblown idea. It was the same with the original PS5, when it turned out the vast majority were bought by 'real' consumers.
This is all about people wanting to downplay the fact that the Pro model is just more popular than they want to admit - the whole 'nobody actually wants the PS5 Pro' brigade. It's a niche product, of course, but many of us definitely do want it - and I'm glad I got in my preorder!
Re: Big Tech Cuts Made to Get Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Running on PS4
@sanderson72
Don't fat shame the original PS5!
Anyway, we've wandered far away from the original topic I think. But the one point I would make is that I just don't agree with the narrative that the PS5 doesn't have enough games worth playing. Sure, we'd all like more first party games, but there are plenty of second and third party games that either aren't on PS4 (Stellar Blade, Alan Wake 2, Baldur's Gate 3, Final Fantasy 16 etc.) or play much worse (hello, Cyberpunk!). At any rate, I've been playing mine solidly (and happily) since I got it day one. Roll on PS5 Pro!
Re: Big Tech Cuts Made to Get Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Running on PS4
@sanderson72
Ok, though that's still over twice as slow. Look, I have no problem with people spending their money how they want - but in 2024, it seems a bit odd to be recommending spending money on an upgrade for a PS4 Pro (which only a small % of PS4 players have to begin with), when there's a much more powerful option out there. As I said earlier, save your pennies - and get yourself a cheap used PS5 instead, maybe (especially once the PS5 Pro drops and more used base models will probably enter the market)
Re: Big Tech Cuts Made to Get Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Running on PS4
@nomither6
Hint: it has the words 'Jedi' and 'Survivor' in the title. You know, the subject of the article?
If you didn't manage to get as far as the second paragraph, here's the relevant sentence:
'An initial load into the open zone of Koboh can take over two minutes (10 seconds on PS5)'
Re: Big Tech Cuts Made to Get Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Running on PS4
@LavenderShroud
But you're happy with 2 minute loading times versus 10 seconds? Not to mention lower frame rates, pop in etc. (check out the full digital foundry review for more).
Some people seem to have this idea that PS5 games are just slightly prettier versions of PS4 ones, but there's a whole host of performance improvements you get as well. Which is why, if you can afford it, you'd be much better off getting the PS5 version.
Re: Big Tech Cuts Made to Get Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Running on PS4
@LavenderShroud
If someone is willing to buy lower quality versions of current gen games like Jedi Survivor for their PS4, then presumably they do want PS5 games?
Re: Big Tech Cuts Made to Get Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Running on PS4
@Flaming_Kaiser
Which was my point precisely. Use it to play older games for a fraction of their original cost ... but if you can afford to buy newer games at full price, I'd say you are much better off upgrading to PS5 than sticking with PS4 for subpar versions of current gen games
Re: Big Tech Cuts Made to Get Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Running on PS4
Honestly, people still playing on ancient last gen hardware surely don't buy new, full price titles? At this point, I assumed that these machines are just used to play cheap, older games? I mean, if you can afford new games like this surely you'd just save your pennies and get a PS5?
Re: PS6 Is Already Deep in Development, Backwards Compatibility of High Importance
@Medic_alert
'... I think we just have different models of console in the same eco-system that have different performance levels but no longer gate content behind a new piece of hardware.'
I mean, not really. Sure, there are more cross-gen titles today, but PS5 still 'gates' plenty of content from the PS4 - whether first or second party games like Spiderman 2, Returnal, Helldivers 2 etc., or third-party ones like Alan Wake 2 or Baldur's Gate 3. And this will only increase over the next few years. It will probably be the same with PS6 - to begin with, quite a few cross-gen games, but there will still be PS6 games you can't play on your PS5, which will grow in number over time. As long as there are consoles, there will likely still be generations and games 'exclusive' to each. Otherwise, new consoles would only ever be 'Pro' versions of preceeding ones, which manufacturers like Sony are well aware sell a small fraction of 'proper' upgrades.
Re: Prospective PS5 Pro Buyers Cause Surge in Disc Drive Sales
If you're in the UK, you can get one on EE for £88.18 - it's on at £97.99, but they have a 10% discount code (on the website) for some gaming items at the moment. I just ordered one at this price because, yes, I will definitely be getting a Pro