By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Hardstuck-Platinum on 28 May 2025
Edit Thread
Darc Requiem said:
Hardstuck-Platinum said:

Apart from what I've put in bold, I think everything you're saying is right. It is extremely risky but the PlayStation division is successful enough that they can afford to take those risks. This is not like the PS3 days where the division was genuinely struggling and at risk of closing if the PS4 wasn't successful. MS has released about four games already this year on PS5 and more are coming for the rest of the year, so if Marathon fails it's not disastrous for Sony because they've got so many games coming to their platform now anyway. So, thanks to MS and other third party publishers having a steady stream of games, it frees up Sony's first party to make those GaaS games and take those risks. Like i said, if you throw enough poo at a wall something will stick eventually so it's worth it to keep trying

I couldn't disagree with you more. Sony is trend chasing and they've abandoned what they were good at it to do so. Setting trends is the way to make money, trend chasing is rarely as successful the product that set the trend. These live services games are a crap shoot. Sony abandoned the consistent and steady income of their single player franchises for what amounts to the gaming version of a lottery ticket. That strategy is foolhardy at best. Thus far their live service initiative has netted them the biggest bomb in gaming history (Concord), numerous cancelled titles they've burned money on (TLOU Factions, Bluepoints Gaas God of War, etc.), and they've gotten nothing to show for it but two upcoming games Fairgames and Marathon that don't have a good outlook.

The one live service hit that they do have, Helldivers 2, wasn't even apart their initiative. Which just cements the point that GaaS titles are a crap shoot. The biggest hits are usually game stumbled into by accident. And forcing single player adept studios to make a Live Service games has been a consistent recipe for disaster. With Bioware's Anthem and Platinum Games' Babylon's Fall being recent examples. For anyone that watches American Football, the best analogy I can come up with is GaaS titles are like drafting a Quarterback. Everyone does extensive research on what they think is best prospect and it amounts to nothing because the "number 1 QB prospect" is rarely ever the best QB to come out of that draft. The most glaring example of this is Brock Purdy. He was the last player taken in the entire draft that year and has been the QB taken in that draft by far.

Sony is trend chasing and they've abandoned what they were good at it to do so

So what? what has it cost them? Is their console sales suffering because of it? No. Are investors spooked by it? No. Are third parties releasing less games on their platform because Concord failed? No. Are gamers angry that there's not enough games releasing on the system? No. MS is practically releasing their whole slate of games on there so that won't be an issue. 

Again, I don't think what you're saying is wrong. It's just that the way your talking is making it sound a failed GaaS game like Concord is putting Sony at a greater risk than it actually is. Sony's last financial report was very strong and the stock is approaching near all time highs. If all these failed GaaS projects was badly effecting the PS division it would show in their financial reports but it isn't. People are still talking like this is the PS3 vs 360 days, this is the problem. Sony had a lot to lose back then and couldn't afford any more losses in their gaming division. They are in a strong position right now where they can take risks and have failed games and it not effect them too much.