Quantcast
Rumor: Sony lining up a bid to acquire Remedy.

Forums - Sony Discussion - Rumor: Sony lining up a bid to acquire Remedy.

JRPGfan said:
think-man said:
I've never played any of their games, but I'd rather they bought a Japanese studio or expand an existing studio and bring back some old IPs like Jak, Wild arms, Arc the Lad or Legend of Dragoon.

tbh I think I would rather see money spent that way too.
Time for a new Wild Arms + Legend of Dragoon.

The time is way past for more LoD.

We should be at LoD 8 already.



Around the Network

Remedy have really only made 1 or 2 great games.. they also dont appear to be cheap. I think Sony have a much bigger choice out there than Remedy and alot cheaper aswell.



Azzanation said:
Remedy have really only made 1 or 2 great games.. they also dont appear to be cheap. I think Sony have a much bigger choice out there than Remedy and alot cheaper aswell.

Which games would you say that is?



KBG29 said:
twintail said:

Considering how much their games cost, and how well they have been selling, I just don't see it happening. That is not the best way to get their investment back on these games.

MP and GaaS titles sure, but not their cinematic SP titles.

Sorry about the formatng on the last post, tried posting from my Smartphone.

I honestly think they will make more offering their games to more consumers, whether it be through Subscription or Full Sales. I think I understand what you are saying, in the fact that they get $60 from the sale of a 1st party game on PSN vs anywhere from $5 - $20 a month from a PS Now Subscriber. If someone only wanted God of War, they could grab PS Now for 1 month, Sony splits a share of $20 from PS Now, and only earns a fraction of the full sale. In this case, if they engaged the same amount of players, then the revenue/profits from GOW would dramatically decrease. However, I don't think that is a realistic scenario. More likely, they would end up selling Physical copies, Digital copies, and engaging a larger untapped audience via PS Now. So, I believe overall they still come out ahead even with a subscription.

In the case that they only offer 1st Party Games Day One as full purchases through PS Now, then it doesn't change anything, except making the game available to a larger number of consumers, which can only improve Sales, Revenue, and Profits.

Just look at the Music/Movie/TV industry. Even though you have Netflix, Hulu, Crackle, Youtube, Spotify, Apple Music, and many other Ad based and Subscription based services, they still sell Physical and Digital copies, and people still go see them in theaters or concert. That is part of choice, just because people can do somthing for free doesn't mean they will always take that option. Actually, offering things for free can end up leading to more money, as more people will try something, and then be willing to pay a premium to expereince whats next.

If Sony decided to go Disney on us, and buys like Take-Two, Capcom, Square-Enix, and Remedy, then I think they would be able to keep people subscribed to PS Now all year, and they would be able to dramatically improve their Revenue and Profits. That is extreme, though it would be interesting. Like I said, I want to see Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony grab as many devs as possible, and start puttting out Genre Defining AAA titles on a regular basis. 

No worries about the formatting. Smart phone posting on here is not the easiest thing, I know!

The thing is, PS Now would have to be a brand new market without overlap for this scenario to work. If it just includes the existing market, which is most likely, then this would in fact dilute the profit margin for Sony as the PS Now subs could easily be at a far cheaper price point. I think EA Access is a good example here: I will most definitely without a doubt subscribe for 1 month to play Titanfall 2. EA Access for 1 month is cheaper than I have seen TF2 go for 2nd hand or ever on sale. Then I will wait for the new SW and do the same. 

BUT, if the market actually grows because of it, and physical/ digital sales remain intact, then sure I think there is viability in day 1 releases for Sony games. I just don't think that is the reality. At least not now. 

I do feel that the MP portions of games could easily go day 1 on the service. This will make the service more attractive without compromising their cinematic SP experiences too much. Ppl who want UC5 want it because of the campaign mode, the MP mode is just a bonus I feel. 

I also don't think those other services are quite similar enough. Cinemas are still getting releases well before they come to streaming platforms, where they enjoy additional revenue. This makes sense from Sony's perspective. Netflix originals are touch and go in terms of quality, and if profit margins are going to suffer for Sony games, their budgets for future games will too. I also don't think that the budget for making an album is equivalent to that of an AAA game. I could be wrong, sure, but I doubt it. I get the comparisons, but I don't see how they quite relate. 

Of course, if Sony were to do this, then I think they will have the content (especially legacy) to back it up. But AAA development is ultimately not an east or quick endeavour. Imagine if Sony were banking on the cancelled SM game to release, or UC4 to release sooner (before troubled development, which also affected TLoU2)? 

And I do want to say that if 1st party games came day 1 to PSNow, I would be there. I have less desire these days to actually care about whether I own the game or not. I just want to play it and move on to new experiences. So it would suit me , and save me so money. 



Azuren said:
Hynad said:

And then, “their games were never truly good anyway so who cares”...

RolStoppable said:
Meh... hard to care about this when Remedy hasn't made an actually good game in a long time.

I have to wonder if this was intentional.

I wonder if Rol went back in time to points over the last decade and made it appear that Remedy have had one title over 80% and that was an 83% 7 years ago on the X360...

https://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/alan-wake

https://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/alan-wakes-american-nightmare

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/quantum-break

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/death-rally-2012

So yeah, that's pretty insane trolling to travel back in time and make it seem like they've been relevant or good in the last decade.



Fancy hearing me on an amateur podcast with friends gushing over one of my favourite games? https://youtu.be/1I7JfMMxhf8

Around the Network
twintail said:
KBG29 said:

Sorry about the formatng on the last post, tried posting from my Smartphone.

I honestly think they will make more offering their games to more consumers, whether it be through Subscription or Full Sales. I think I understand what you are saying, in the fact that they get $60 from the sale of a 1st party game on PSN vs anywhere from $5 - $20 a month from a PS Now Subscriber. If someone only wanted God of War, they could grab PS Now for 1 month, Sony splits a share of $20 from PS Now, and only earns a fraction of the full sale. In this case, if they engaged the same amount of players, then the revenue/profits from GOW would dramatically decrease. However, I don't think that is a realistic scenario. More likely, they would end up selling Physical copies, Digital copies, and engaging a larger untapped audience via PS Now. So, I believe overall they still come out ahead even with a subscription.

In the case that they only offer 1st Party Games Day One as full purchases through PS Now, then it doesn't change anything, except making the game available to a larger number of consumers, which can only improve Sales, Revenue, and Profits.

Just look at the Music/Movie/TV industry. Even though you have Netflix, Hulu, Crackle, Youtube, Spotify, Apple Music, and many other Ad based and Subscription based services, they still sell Physical and Digital copies, and people still go see them in theaters or concert. That is part of choice, just because people can do somthing for free doesn't mean they will always take that option. Actually, offering things for free can end up leading to more money, as more people will try something, and then be willing to pay a premium to expereince whats next.

If Sony decided to go Disney on us, and buys like Take-Two, Capcom, Square-Enix, and Remedy, then I think they would be able to keep people subscribed to PS Now all year, and they would be able to dramatically improve their Revenue and Profits. That is extreme, though it would be interesting. Like I said, I want to see Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony grab as many devs as possible, and start puttting out Genre Defining AAA titles on a regular basis. 

No worries about the formatting. Smart phone posting on here is not the easiest thing, I know!

The thing is, PS Now would have to be a brand new market without overlap for this scenario to work. If it just includes the existing market, which is most likely, then this would in fact dilute the profit margin for Sony as the PS Now subs could easily be at a far cheaper price point. I think EA Access is a good example here: I will most definitely without a doubt subscribe for 1 month to play Titanfall 2. EA Access for 1 month is cheaper than I have seen TF2 go for 2nd hand or ever on sale. Then I will wait for the new SW and do the same. 

BUT, if the market actually grows because of it, and physical/ digital sales remain intact, then sure I think there is viability in day 1 releases for Sony games. I just don't think that is the reality. At least not now. 

I do feel that the MP portions of games could easily go day 1 on the service. This will make the service more attractive without compromising their cinematic SP experiences too much. Ppl who want UC5 want it because of the campaign mode, the MP mode is just a bonus I feel. 

I also don't think those other services are quite similar enough. Cinemas are still getting releases well before they come to streaming platforms, where they enjoy additional revenue. This makes sense from Sony's perspective. Netflix originals are touch and go in terms of quality, and if profit margins are going to suffer for Sony games, their budgets for future games will too. I also don't think that the budget for making an album is equivalent to that of an AAA game. I could be wrong, sure, but I doubt it. I get the comparisons, but I don't see how they quite relate. 

Of course, if Sony were to do this, then I think they will have the content (especially legacy) to back it up. But AAA development is ultimately not an east or quick endeavour. Imagine if Sony were banking on the cancelled SM game to release, or UC4 to release sooner (before troubled development, which also affected TLoU2)? 

And I do want to say that if 1st party games came day 1 to PSNow, I would be there. I have less desire these days to actually care about whether I own the game or not. I just want to play it and move on to new experiences. So it would suit me , and save me so money. 

TO have the MP portion of their games on PSNow to entice users to buy the full game, or then one year later (when most sales were already made anyway and games are severely discounted) put the SP on PSNow could work and add revenue.

What I would like to avoid would be the silly proposition making their games episodes. Like Each of the major IPs from Sony being butchered in 6-12 parts to release along all year so the person would need to keep sub to play each month (of course he could wait until the last month to play all for the price of 1, but that would also have the 1 year price cut and wait that is already present) and with a constant inflow of AAA every month would have one AAA portion of Sony exclusive to keep a stream.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Ganoncrotch said:
Azuren said:

I have to wonder if this was intentional.

I wonder if Rol went back in time to points over the last decade and made it appear that Remedy have had one title over 80% and that was an 83% 7 years ago on the X360...

https://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/alan-wake

https://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/alan-wakes-american-nightmare

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/quantum-break

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/death-rally-2012

So yeah, that's pretty insane trolling to travel back in time and make it seem like they've been relevant or good in the last decade.

The fact that Remedy's games aren't well-reviewed has no bearing on someone pointing out that people are going to start claiming Remedy doesn't make good games, and then two posts later that is exactly what happens. I think it's fair to at least wonder if something was said with an intended effect in that scenario.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

Replicant said:
Azzanation said:
Remedy have really only made 1 or 2 great games.. they also dont appear to be cheap. I think Sony have a much bigger choice out there than Remedy and alot cheaper aswell.

Which games would you say that is?

Based off reviews and sales than its Alan Wake and Max Payne. Every other game they have made has been very expensive projects with little success in terms of critic reviews and sales



DonFerrari said:
twintail said:

No worries about the formatting. Smart phone posting on here is not the easiest thing, I know!

The thing is, PS Now would have to be a brand new market without overlap for this scenario to work. If it just includes the existing market, which is most likely, then this would in fact dilute the profit margin for Sony as the PS Now subs could easily be at a far cheaper price point. I think EA Access is a good example here: I will most definitely without a doubt subscribe for 1 month to play Titanfall 2. EA Access for 1 month is cheaper than I have seen TF2 go for 2nd hand or ever on sale. Then I will wait for the new SW and do the same. 

BUT, if the market actually grows because of it, and physical/ digital sales remain intact, then sure I think there is viability in day 1 releases for Sony games. I just don't think that is the reality. At least not now. 

I do feel that the MP portions of games could easily go day 1 on the service. This will make the service more attractive without compromising their cinematic SP experiences too much. Ppl who want UC5 want it because of the campaign mode, the MP mode is just a bonus I feel. 

I also don't think those other services are quite similar enough. Cinemas are still getting releases well before they come to streaming platforms, where they enjoy additional revenue. This makes sense from Sony's perspective. Netflix originals are touch and go in terms of quality, and if profit margins are going to suffer for Sony games, their budgets for future games will too. I also don't think that the budget for making an album is equivalent to that of an AAA game. I could be wrong, sure, but I doubt it. I get the comparisons, but I don't see how they quite relate. 

Of course, if Sony were to do this, then I think they will have the content (especially legacy) to back it up. But AAA development is ultimately not an east or quick endeavour. Imagine if Sony were banking on the cancelled SM game to release, or UC4 to release sooner (before troubled development, which also affected TLoU2)? 

And I do want to say that if 1st party games came day 1 to PSNow, I would be there. I have less desire these days to actually care about whether I own the game or not. I just want to play it and move on to new experiences. So it would suit me , and save me so money. 

TO have the MP portion of their games on PSNow to entice users to buy the full game, or then one year later (when most sales were already made anyway and games are severely discounted) put the SP on PSNow could work and add revenue.

What I would like to avoid would be the silly proposition making their games episodes. Like Each of the major IPs from Sony being butchered in 6-12 parts to release along all year so the person would need to keep sub to play each month (of course he could wait until the last month to play all for the price of 1, but that would also have the 1 year price cut and wait that is already present) and with a constant inflow of AAA every month would have one AAA portion of Sony exclusive to keep a stream.

Yeah I think so. Considering how well some of these games have sold (GoW, Horizon, SM, DG) without MP, I feel like MP is clearly not a driving force for the IPs going forward. Sony did experiment a bit with this during the PS3 days, when UC3 and KZ3 (I think these 2 and nothing else) were give F2P versions of their MP.

As to when the SP goes onto PSNow... I think Sony can decide depending on sales. If it is 1 year I feel it is too easy for ppl to calculate, and some of these games are still selling really well. But yeah whenever they feel sales have dropped off for said games.

For sure, I think episodic would be bad BUT only if they start trying to adapt their current lineup for that. I see nothing wrong with say something like Hitman or even how Siren PS3 worked, if episodic is how the game is initially pitched. That is, the game is designed 1st and foremost to be episodic. It is an interesting dilemma though. 



It is a small company, only 20M€ turnover 2018, so they wouldvreally benefit from financial backing of Sony to make AAA titles that cost 100+ M€ to make.