Topic: Official PlayStation Thread

I had forgotten about Kevin Butler. Those were the days. Some of his stuff was truly hilarious.

This whole cross-gen fiasco has gotten out of hand. Yes, it's of Sony's own making, so they deserve some of it, but the fact that some people are so angry is ridiculous. I know those same people will be saying how great insert game title here is once it is released, making all of this basically moot. There will obviously still be the people that sit there and analyze everything "Oh my god, the textures on those trees are so last gen. Deleting this game even though it's probably going to win Game of the Year!", but ultimately this will all likely be an afterthought. At most maybe remembered as being silly like it ultimately is, and obviously I'm not a PlayStation fanboy.

@KilloWertz I don't think people realise though that the more they demand out of the companies, the longer the development for games is going to take for said companies. I mean, several games now take 3-5 years before they're done. How is the situation going to look like in a decade? Are games going to suddenly take 5-7 years instead? I've come to this realisation now because I just don't care about high-end performance anymore. People think technical performance and visuals are important but then you're going to have to wait even longer for the games to come out. Not to mention that console generations are going to feel shorter relatively to the amount of time that it takes to develop a game. If a generation is on average six years and it takes five years to develop a game, then we won't even see the next one until the next generation has started. And that is going to create issues as for which systems to develop a game for. I'm hypothesising that we're absolutely going to see more cross-gen games from here on out as development cycles increase while generation cycles stay constant because companies are going to start developing for the current consoles and end up releasing their game on the next consoles as well. Gaming is seriously such a mess now, at least before we would end up with tons of trilogies every generation and now we're barely making it to duologies.

@LtSarge You may end up being right on everything, but also at some point you think the developers would eventually figure out ways to keep the development time from escalating much further, whether it's the tech they use themselves "catching up" or whatever else. I'd also fully expect this generation to be closer to the PS3/360 generation in length, if only because it has only really half started right now because of there being a struggle to get consoles out.

If they continue to rise though, it's not really the people's fault, as it's inevitable each console generation gets fancier technology in the systems. The people are at fault with all of the complaining and threats to employees though. Like I said already, the vast majority of people aren't going to care once they get the opportunity to play the games. Once Miles Morales came out, was the vast majority of the opinions on the game very positive? Likely, as I don't bother joining in to the masses on social media most of the time. Will it be the same once Horizon Forbidden West comes out and is averaging at least 90 on Metacritic and ends up being up for Game of the Year, or God of War in 2022? Of course. People don't put much thought into what they say anymore, especially on social media.

@LtSarge The commercial announcing the PS3 price cut was probably my favorite for that console before that tribute ad about all the mascots coming together to celebrate that guy who plays all their games

I'm glad to see Sony's acknowledging that they own Sunset Overdrive now

It'd be nice to see Sunset turned into another big franchise for Insomniac in between their commitments to Ratchet & Clank and Spider-Man because I loved the first game when I played it on PC

Phil Spencer being a real one

This guy can't be consistent for one second lol.

Housemarque has been acquired by Sony: https://www.pushsquare.com/news/2021/06/sony_confirms_acquisi...

I've said this in the past but personally, I like acquisitions because I want more reasons to buy a console. Same with Xbox, same with PlayStation. However, as a consumer this acquisition doesn't really give me any immediate benefits or any future benefits at all besides future titles being potentially more ambitious and creative. Compare it to the ZeniMax acquisition where we've seen dozens of ZeniMax titles being added to Game Pass and we know that all future ZeniMax titles will be added day one on Game Pass. There are no such consumer benefits whenever PlayStation acquires a studio.

Not to mention that Microsoft is pursuing studio acquisitions because they have a purpose in mind, which is to release a steady flow of first-party titles every year: https://www.purexbox.com/news/2021/06/xbox_wants_to_release_a...

In Sony's case however, they're just acquiring studios to respond to the moves Microsoft has been making, but they don't have a purpose for these acquisitions. Games like Returnal are already exclusive, so it's not like PlayStation is receiving more exclusive titles than without these acquisitions. They're just buying them for the sake of it, which is why I can't really be that excited for what the future holds when these studios have already been making games for primarily PlayStation. Unless Sony is planning on using these studio acquisitions along with the rest of their first-party studios to create a Game Pass service with each studio's games, but that's yet to be seen.

If there's no point to these acquisitions, then I don't see how this will be good for us consumers. Sure future games might become better but we won't be able to reap any immediate or tangible benefits.

Is it that different from MS purchasing Undead Labs or Playground Games? Playground had announced they were interested in expanding and potentially making 'multi-platform' games before MS acquired them and Undead Labs have only made 'State of Decay' exclusively on MS in the past too but were 'independent'.

You can argue that a LOT of MS's acquisitions haven't really had an immediate benefit. Double Fine, InXile & Compulsion, who joined at around the same, still haven't released a game 'exclusively' to Xbox so what 'immediate' benefits did they bring? I don't know what games are on PSNow or when games like Returnal could be added. The immediate 'benefit' of these acquisitions is that 'potential' and what it 'means' to the publishers target audience. From an Xbox perspective, all those acquisitions add up to Potential - 23 Studio's producing games is much better than 5. Yes you can consider independent studio exclusives (although you don't always know if they are timed or not - like Ori or Cuphead). Adding Insomniac and Housemarque (possibly Bluepoint too it seems) is a statement of intent to continue bringing games to Playstation customers - whether immediately beneficial or more Long term.

All exclusives mean to me is that I 'need' to buy a system specifically to play those. I can't get away with just 1 platform to play ALL the games I want to so I have to buy multiple devices. Exclusive means I don't have a choice which platform to play on. Whether MS or Sony buy studios or not, doesn't affect whether I can play the games those make. Hopefully, these acquisitions offer stability and financial security to create the 'best' games they can. Housemarque alone would not entice me to buy a PS5, but it adds to an impressive line up of studio's...

So I've been contemplating buying a PS5 recently because it's been a long time since I bought a new console and I think it'd be exciting to play on a new console. I haven't seen any store here in Sweden sell Series X ever since it came out last year, otherwise I'd contemplate buying it as well. However, due to its scarcity, a PS5 costs about €700 here, €200 more than its normal price. And for that price, I'm finding it incredibly hard to justify purchasing a new system when there aren't enough PS5 exclusives to justify that much money. I've been looking up lists of the best games on PS5 and people typically mention titles like Watch Dogs Legion, Assassin's Creed Valhalla, Spider-Man Miles Morales, Sackboy, Resident Evil Village and Control Ultimate Edition to name a few. All of which are available on PS4 and some of which I already own and could technically play right now on my PS4. Granted, I still have a base PS4 so most of these games would probably run better on a PS5 but it's not worth spending €700 just for a smoother experience with a couple of titles. There are some PS5 exclusives like Ratchet & Clank, Returnal and Demon's Souls, but as I mentioned paying €700 just to play a handful of titles is simply not worth it.

In the past I've usually talked hypothetically about PS5 since I didn't have an interest in buying one. But now that I have an interest in the system, it really is dawning on me that it's absolutely not worth buying one right now if you already own a last-gen system like PS4 or Xbox One. And it's not worth buying a Series X now either for that matter. I mean, I'm currently playing one of the Series X exclusives The Medium through Xbox Cloud Gaming so I don't even need to buy a Series X. Not to mention that most upcoming PlayStation exclusives like Horizon and God of War are coming to PS4 as well.

In other words, the primary reason for me to buy a PS5 now would be to experience the feeling of a new console, which is a temporary feeling and will probably go away within a couple of months. The secondary reason would be to play all my PS4 games (which consists of hundreds of titles, hence my interest in PS5 over Series X) with better performance. And all these reasons are honestly quite poor when the tradeoff is €700.

I really want to buy a PS5 just to experience the feeling of a new console since it's been a long time since I bought a new console. I just wish there were more reasons to buy one right now. I feel like the primary reasons people are buying these systems are either because they're loyalists, or because they didn't own a last-gen console, or because they want to buy the competitor's system (e.g. a PS4 owner buying a Series X) and try out all the franchises that aren't on the platform they have been playing on. I don't match any of these groups and it sucks.

@LtSarge I know that everyone has their own personal opinion on what they 'want' from a brand new console to 'justify' spending that kind of money. If that's only the games that they have no choice but to buy a console to play - games like R&C which are not coming to last gen, then that's their choice.

I bought both the Pro and XB1X despite both consoles not having any 'exclusive' software. The list of playable games on Pro (or XB1X) is identical to the base hardware. For me, the fact that pretty much every game released after these came out, as well as some older game 'updates', played 'better' primarily and often with increased visual clarity - particularly over a Base XB1 which struggled with consistent frame rates and very blurry visuals (compared to the others). To me, it was worth the cost to upgrade to get the 'best' console experience I could.

Yes I could of stuck with my XB1, playing games at 720-900p (Dynamic scaling) and promising '30fps' but invariably hanging somewhere between 25-30 with 'occasional' drops, stutters etc. Playing games with pop-in because the texture data hasn't streamed in yet or the draw distances have had to be culled. I could go on but why would I be happy playing at 720-900/25-30 when I can play at up to 4k/60 with better input response, better consistency etc etc.

Yes you can play Horizon or God of War - both of which will offer 60fps on PS5 (no doubt), Higher visual quality, textures etc and almost instant Loading. Maybe the Pro will have an uncapped (up to 60fps) mode but the PS4 will likely be capped to 30fps, with all the other cutbacks to make it work.

Visually we can add a lot more detail. Graphically, the rendering technique for the underwater scenes is special for the PlayStation 5, it has extra details and extra systems, like the wave technique is better on that system.” As well as improved water and environmental details, the PS5 version is able to make use of a cinematic-grade lighting system that the PS4 can only use in cutscenes.

The PS5 version of Horizon Forbidden West will also make the most of 3D audio and the DualSense controller; as previously revealed, the adaptive triggers will simulate the resistance of a bow string. As well as the Faster Loading - great for Fast Travelling too.

Its not quite as bad as settling for a Switch to play Wolfenstein, Doom etc for example just because you can and its saves buying a PS/XB/PC. Yes they are great ports, scaled down well to the 'weaker' console but I'd buy a Series X/PS5 to play Doom at upto 120fps (4x the Switch speed with much better visual clarity) or 4k/60 with RT - its a fast paced game that benefits from higher frame rates/lower latency inputs. You could pay the same to play at ~540-720/30 with numerous visual downgrades or play at 4k/60 with RT, 1080/120

As time goes on too, you could end up with more games like Cyberpunk 2077 - runs 'bad' on last gen but releases because people will still buy it or more like Black Ops 3 - no campaign, vastly stripped back visual style on PS3 but the 'full' game on PS4. Fifa22's biggest 'update' isn't coming to 'last gen' versions which will change the way the game plays. You are still paying the 'same' (at least in some cases - I know Sony and some other Publishers are changing more for next gen) but getting a scaled down, stripped back version.

I don't care that I could of played AC:Valhalla, Control, Spider-Man (both) etc on last gen machines. I get to play these at 'up to' 4k, up to 60fps, some with Ray tracing, 3D Audio, Haptic Feedback etc.. Its not like a movie where the resolution doesn't make a 'massive' difference overall to the story as Games are interactive. Having to wait a minute to fast travel, to load in etc is like advert breaks, Frame Rate drops are like streaming stutters, Visual issues (Pop-in, glitches, clipping, odd lighting effects, quality changes (like a low polygon/res version swapping to a higher quality at a certain distance), broken physics etc etc) are like static/digital interference that breaks the immersion, Dynamic Resolution changes are like Bandwidth drops whilst streaming that drop the quality from 4k to HD to SD etc...

You can make do with that - at least you can still watch the 'same' movie at SD streamed to mobile over 3g with stutters, ad breaks etc or you could buy the 4k HDR Bluray and watch it on a massive Home Cinema set-up with Dolby Atmos, HDR etc, no ad breaks, no drops in quality, the best PQ and best Audio experience. I see Games in a similar way - but to me, its more important as Games are interactive and Hardware makes a big difference. I could play a LOT of games on my S10+ Mobile with Game Pass - but I have to put up with Streaming lag, a much smaller screen (not great if I want to Snipe an enemy a long way off - especially with 'lower' resolution to pick out details of a 'person' over a bush.

Anyway, for me, it isn't just about whether I can (or cannot) play a game on a device, Its more about whether or not its the most consistent, best PQ, best playing version I can play that also fits with my preference for 'console' gaming. In 2013, PS4 only had 'Killzone' of interest to me, but I still upgraded because BF4 wasn't scaled back - offering the full 64player BF experience at 60fps instead of 24player max at 30fps on PS3. AC4:BF, CoD:Ghosts, Lego: Marvel etc all had visual upgrades and I also bought LoU Remastered, Nathan Drake Collection, Tomb Raider - all 60fps and Visually better on PS4 vs PS3.

I have every intention of buying Horizon: Forbidden West & God of War: Ragnarok. I already have both PS5 versions of Spider-Man (as well as the PS4 Collectors Edition of Spider-man and 'annoyed' I had to pay 'extra' to get the 'Ultimate' edition of MM just to get the PS5 upgrade for SM - but 60fps is 'transformative' as it makes the game 'smoother' and more responsive to play. I don't want to play H:FW on PS4 - especially after seeing the PS5 version and knowing I can play it at 60fps too so I had to get a PS5 as soon as I could.

like I said at the very start though, EVERYONE is different and has their own personal reasons for buying (or not) and when its 'right' for them. I know I am at one end of the scale where the benefits of buying the hardware as soon as I can to get the 'best' experience in ALL games outweighs the cost. To me, its not about the games I have to buy the hardware to play (exclusive to that gen), its about ALL the games. I am not buying a PS5/Series X just to play the Exclusives to that gen console - I buy them to play the 'best' console version of ANY game regardless. I'll get to play the best version of H:FW, GoW:R as well as play the best versions of any game coming to last gen too. I don't have to make do with sub 1080p and 'up to' 30fps scaled down versions of these but get the 'full' experience from the start. I couldn't settle for 'Cyberpunk 2077' on base XB1/PS4 - just because the game was released on it - when I could have PS5/Series X performance to make it actually 'playable'. Access alone is not enough to me, I want the best 'playing' console version and that is directly tied to consistent, higher frame rates.

You are obviously at the other end, where you feel you need enough 'exclusive' games to that platform to justify purchase at the current price - even if it instantly improves many of the games in your library, improves the overall 'experience' etc. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that either - it just shows that people have different criteria to each other which makes perfect sense as we are all in different situations too.

The TL:DR is that its not about which platform(s) games 'release' on, its about which Platform will give me the 'best' place to play that game. The 'only' place to play R&C is PS5, so its the 'best' by default. Games like Horizon: Forbidden West, God of War: Ragnarok, BF2042, Control, Spider-Man (both), AC: Valhalla and many other games released or releasing on last gen too will be 'better' on PS5. BF2042 is limited to 64 players on PS4, 128 players on PS5 - its like the 24players BF4 on PS3 vs 64 players on PS4 - scaled down experience. Fifa 22 is missing its 'evolution' on PS4 so even if there isn't any 'next gen' only games releasing, I am playing the 'next gen' versions and getting the 'next gen' experience in ALL releases. So to me, it was worth the 'cost' as its benefiting every new game I buy as well as many games I already owned - but I also appreciate that others, such as yourself, feels differently.

For quite some time now, I've been thinking that Sony genuinely doesn't have a clear strategy with what they want to do with PlayStation. Nintendo has a clear strategy, which is to focus on their unique hardware and popular exclusives. Microsoft has a clear strategy, which is to focus on subscription services and letting people play anywhere without having to own an Xbox. But Sony, their focus is just all over the place. They want more single-player games, live service games, VR games, their own Game Pass competitor, they want to make movies and TV shows out of existing PlayStation franchises. Like seriously, what the hell are they doing?

The problem I have with their approach is that they will never go all out on most of these things because they are spreading their focus way too much. They're never going to compete with Microsoft in terms of subscription services. VR is never going to take off unless you provide tons of great experiences. Live service games can be either a hit or a miss and if there are too many misses, they're just going to give up on the model.

This is the issue that is deeply rooted into Sony's DNA, which is that they rarely innovate, they mostly react to current market trends. That's why most of these things won't succeed because they won't go all out with them. They're already doing great with their single-player games, but just like Shawn Layden mentioned in the past, these $100 million blockbusters will soon reach a breaking point where it's too risky to make new IPs and instead sequels will be continuously made: https://www.pushsquare.com/news/2021/09/ex-playstation_exec_s...

So I don't know, I just don't feel as excited for PlayStation as I used to. They're focusing on too many things instead of just focusing on the one thing they're really good at, which is single-player experiences. People will tell me that Sony will still make single-player exclusives, but the thing is they might not be. Or they may create fewer of them in the future. Because that's what happens when you spread your focus too much: everything becomes worse.

@LtSarge It's possible you'll be right, but that's also why they bought Bungie so they can help. Sony's studios also have multiple teams, so they can make multiple games. I'm not overly concerned about them abandoning what has gotten them to where they are at today. At least not yet. The movie and TV show part doesn't take resources away. VR they've done for a while now (a little over 5 years). We'll have to wait and see what they end up doing with their Game Pass competitor.

Their vision isn't as clear as it once was because they are more silent about things than they used to be, but they still innovate. The DualSense is definitely innovation. In the end, not looking to argue though. Just looking at another side of their recent activity and why I'm not concerned right now.

Sony has had it pretty easy for the past 10yrs or so in a business world that hadn't changed much since gaming began. A market that was based on 'sales' - best selling games, best selling consoles etc and 'sales' determined success or failure. That's Sony's entire business model.

Some time during the PS4 era, Sony seem to think that they offer the 'premium' Console experience because of both the commercial and critical success of their games, which I think is why you see decisions like Days Gone 2 not being green lit because it didn't score so well with the 'critics'. How can they 'justify' the £10 premium PS5 price for a 7.5 metacritic rated game? That, coupled with a completely Sales focused business plan, is why Sony seems to be 'behind' the times.

MS, perhaps due to the XB1 'mistakes' and 'sales' model they were used to, had to find another way to operate. No doubt the Sales model led to some 'high profile' cancellations (Fable Legends, Scalebound) where the potential 'sales' of those wouldn't recuperate enough in sales due to poor hardware sales). That's where the 'netflix' model or 'Game Pass' was born. Build up enough Subscribers and the game is essentially 'paid for' by the Subscribers so sales are no longer required to recover costs. By building an infrastructure to 'stream' games too, that gives Game Pass much greater reach than a Console alone will. Hence Game Pass is available EVERYWHERE except Playstation/Switch consoles - that's every Xbox since 2013, PC's/Laptops and Mobiles/Tablets.

Game Pass, with its 'monthly' Subscription design, requires at least 1 'big' release every month to bring in Subscribers and retain existing subscribers. MS doesn't want you Subscribing for a month or two around Christmas to play the 1 or 2 exclusives they released that year, only to cancel for the next 10 months until the next years games have all released. They want you to keep subscribed so need 'something' every month to entice Subscribers to stay. That drove MS to build up Studio's and the business model necessitates a need for individual studio's making their 'own' games.

That model fits the future too - regardless of what hardware comes in the future, even if hardware in the home disappears, the Game Pass model works. If your XB1 can't play the latest Xbox game locally, you can still play via streaming. Therefore, even if people can't get a 'Series' console, they can still play the games, still Subscribe to Game Pass. If you can't get a 'PS5' for example, you can't play R&C, Returnal etc so don't 'buy' those games.

Anyway, the fact is that MS stopped following the 'Sales' model which used 'games' to make you buy the Console hardware. That meant every Xbox Studio game would be on any MS powered device. Xbox stopped being 'just' the console, but the entire MS gaming division. Traditionalists were all saying why buy an Xbox when all the Exclusives are also on PC. The whole 'Game Pass' model is so much more Consumer friendly and 'gamer' focussed because if the 'games' are not 'great' gamers that players really want to play, you lose Subs.

When I look at Sony now, I can still see them trying to cling on to the 'traditional' method but also know they cannot keep relying on just 'sales' of their Single Player games on just 1 piece of Hardware as that limits the amount of 'revenue' they can recuperate. I don't have 'accurate' up to date sales, but several months after Returnal released, Sony announced just 560k sales, and 1.1m sales of R&C - two of the years 'best' games (according to many critics) but played by 'so few' compared to over 10m in the first week of FH5 and even Sea of Thieves, the first 'Game Pass Day 1 Exclusive', has had over 25m players.

I don't know if Sony's Spartacus will be a Game Pass competitor - not offering their Single Player games that they think are worth £70 on Day 1 for a £10 a month Subscription you could use to blast through all their games. Maybe 6months later they come to their Subscription, but it still seems they are looking at keeping a 'sales' focussed platform and bringing in more 'live service' games to bring in more revenue over a longer period. I can see them releasing more and more games on PC too - maybe 6months later when they come to 'Spartacus'.

If anything, I think that Sony may well double down on TV/Movies to subsidise their gaming side - others may see it as 'expanding' but with TV/Movies - like Uncharted, Last of Us, Destiny, R&C etc they have another revenue stream to their 'gaming' IP's which in turn also gives them opportunity to product place and promote their own platform which lead to more sales.

@LtSarge I thought Sony's strategy for Playstation was for their games to become like blockbuster movies and to subsidize that via microtransactions from live service games. Then Microsoft disrupted that by aggressively acquiring studios and adding EA Play to Game Pass so Sony needed live service games of their own hence the 10 live service games by March 2026 announcement.

I'd guess Sony started making plans after the massive wave of acquisitions in 2018, Microsoft acquisitions were pretty much being announced at every Xbox event that year.

• Compulsion Games
• inXile
• Ninja Theory
• Obsidian
• Playground Games
• Undead Labs

Then probably the live service side of things sped up after the announcements in September 2020 regarding Microsoft acquiring Bethesda and EA Play added to Game Pass for no extra cost.

@KilloWertz Yeah if I had written that post over at Push Square, I definitely would've gotten a lot of angry replies which is why I posted here since I was hoping people with multiple consoles and therefore multiple perspectives can see where I'm coming from.

With regards to movie and TV shows not taking away resources, I mean they kinda do and kinda don't. The only reason Sony is planning a remake of the first The Last of Us is because of a tie-in with the TV show. I also read that there's a game tie-in with an upcoming Twisted Metal movie. So they kinda do take away resources in that regard, because who asked for a TLOU remake in all honesty.

But yeah, it's still too early to say how all of this will impact PlayStation in the future. I'm just voicing my concern because it doesn't look good for them from my perspective. It's important to find one or two things and stick with them just like Microsoft and Nintendo are doing.

@BAMozzy That's why I like Microsoft's approach because everything they do is for the benefit of Game Pass. Acquisitions, cloud streaming, accessibility options and so on, it all comes back together to Game Pass. Their focus is strictly on providing traditional games of all genres in the most affordable and convenient way possible. The model is supposed to appeal to everyone, while Sony's individual models only appeal to certain crowds. Which is why as a PlayStation user, you can feel a bit left out when they announce more VR games or live service titles when all you want is more narrative-driven experiences. With Game Pass though, even though there are games you might not be interested in initially, you can still give them a try due to how easy it is to sample games. It's important for Microsoft to include all kinds of games on Game Pass, which is how you'll appeal to everyone and why it's a model that I believe in. Especially with all the acquisitions that they are making, which assure me that a lot of games will be added to AND remain on Game Pass permanently.

On a side note, I've been realising in recent time that I just don't care about physical games as much anymore. It's taking up so my space at home and it's pointless for me to buy most games physically because I only play them once and then put them away. Not to mention how much more they cost to buy physically compared to during digital sales. I've bought over 20 back compat games on Xbox the past few weeks, which would've cost me a lot more in terms of physical used copies but now I have all of them in one single space and I don't have to worry about the games taking up space in my room. Because 20 games would take up a LOT of space.

Simply put, I just prefer the convenience and affordability of Game Pass. Being able to stream a 100 GB game instead of waiting hours for it to download and at a €15 monthly price, it's just a much better approach for me. I'm still looking forward to buying Horizon, God of War, Elden Ring and so on, but that's only because they are on PS4 and not only on PS5. This year might be the last one that I'll buy PlayStation games because next year will see PS5 exclusives and I just don't see a compelling reason to buy a PS5 anymore.

@Grumblevolcano Exactly. If you had asked me two years ago about Sony's strategy, I would've said that they want to make more blockbuster games. But now they want a Game Pass competitor and more live service games, it's just too much. They're not going to succeed at all of these things, they need to trim down their overall strategy and focus on the things that they are really good at. I can see a future of both narrative-driven and live service games, but the rest they need to get rid of.

@LtSarge To be honest I don't think Spartacus will actually be a Game Pass competitor, rather something more like a mixture of NSO and Game Pass. Too many of the very important things about Game Pass I don't see Sony doing like day 1 additions, 1st party titles never leaving the service (outside of awkward licensing like Forza with Xbox) and mostly parity between the 3 platforms (console, PC, cloud).

@LtSarge I'll admit that the rumors about Naughty Dog are disappointing if they are truly working on a Last of Us remake and a multiplayer Last of Us given how talented they are. If true and they aren't even working on anything truly new, or even another Uncharted spin-off, then that really sucks. We'll see at some point this year I suppose, so I'll leave that open and only label it as a potential disappointment.

I'd consider it a win in a way that we are getting a new Twisted Metal, so that actually works out in the end. I get what you're saying, but a revival of an old series regardless of why is a win, even if it will be live service.

I'm taking a wait and see approach on Spartacus. We really have no idea what it will actually be. If it gives us access to downloadable versions of PS1-PS3 games, I'll be thrilled. Obviously having some sort of a version of Game Pass, giving us "free" access to modern games as well, would be fine as well. Again, we'll see what actually happens there.

I could go on longer, but I don't really feel like it. Been sick all week, but anyways, I'll wrap this up for now by saying I get the preference for the Xbox business model right now. It's the more affordable option for people who might have to be choosy (no offense) as to when they decide to buy a new gen console. I also appreciate the fact that Sony still does the more classic business model in terms of games and hardware, and with having mediocre internet, I still stick to physical games more with PlayStation due to their excellent compression and usage of UHD discs. I can't deny that it's nice to be able to play titles for "free" as well, so both business models have their positives.

@Grumblevolcano I agree at this point in time, Sony are not ready to put their '£70' First Party Single Player 20hr game into a 'Subscription' model on Day1. I can see them putting games in after 6months or so after its had a chance to sell. If you can sub for £10 and blast through all the years Sony Exclusives that appeal because they're all 6-20hrs long, that isn't ideal for Sony and their business model. Unless they are looking at 'streaming', their Subscription model is also limited to PS users only - the same 'audience' you rely on for sales. I can see them coming 6months+ later to a Subscription service - maybe around the same time the 'best' version goes on sale on PC's

I don't think Sony are ready yet to offer 'Playstation 5' games anywhere but a PS5 on Day 1. They want you to buy a Playstation and if anything, see the PC as an additional revenue stream once the Playstation community have moved on, looking ahead to the next exclusive.

I think Sony are looking at 'Marvel' or 'Star Wars' and seeing how those 'brands' are very lucrative across multiple media - from books/comics,to music, to film/TV and Games so I think they want to do that with their 'Playstation' IP's. See Nathan Drake in a movie, now play the game or played Last of Us, now watch the TV show - and all with strategically placed SONY products. Nate maybe won't be playing Crash as he did in U4 in the movie, but he'll be playing a PS5, maybe R&C, on his Sony OLED TV. The success of Witcher 3, Castlevania and numerous other TV shows and movies that tie into gaming and Sony has made a few gaming related movies - Jumanji, Resident Evil, Monster Hunter, Angry Birds, Uncharted etc as well as Spider-Man and supposedly a Ghost of Tsushima movie in the works. Therefore it maybe makes 'sense' to Sony to use their own IP's more and not only help promote their 'games' and hardware, but also could help sell more 'box office' revenue from movie/TV distribution (Box office, DVD's, Digital movie purchase/rentals, merch etc)

Sony are not just a gaming brand so I can understand why, if they are spending $3.6bn on Bungie, that its 'not' just for the 'games' when it can also benefit their other interests - like Sony Pictures or Sony Music. It might not seem a great deal for Playstation gamers who couldn't care less about movies or merch, couldn't care less about 'live service' and what 'skills' Bungie bring into Sony etc but for Sony, it could end up a bargain for all the revenue and attention it brings - and not 'just' for their gaming division but Sony as a whole.