Not a great title but it'll do for now. I was just thinking about the PSVR and the number of games that are slated for release on the device. Kaz has recently said there are over 100 titles already in development for the PSVR and it's clear that number will increase. But the one thing I never see discussed is the potential increase in games available for the vanilla PS4. You would think there will be a lot of titles that could run quite nicely without VR but of course Sony will want an exclusive library for the device to push sales. That doesn't mean those titles have to stay exlusive though and I reckon a years exclusivity would be enough to drive sales, largely because many more VR titles would have already filled the void before any PSVR games get adjusted to work with the Vanilla PS4.

Just to clarify: I'm saying that eventually one title will work on both devices. I'm not saying there will be two separate games.

One of the reasons I started thinking about this is because of the XB1 games delays which suggest to me there are going to be titles other than Scalebound pushed to 2017. This gives MS a disadvantage this year but an advantage next year. Sony could easily delay a game or two because of their large portfolio but why do that? Why not just take a few well recieved VR games and make them available to everyone? Given that the 'experience' is going to be different on both devices, it also makes sense from a promotional standpoint. I'm sure many people who end up getting a game that was once VR only will be aware (or made aware) that if they had a PSVR, the games would feel and play completely different.

I'm almost certain Sony will do this, even if it's simply to double down on potential sales. All I'm saying is I don't think we should draw a hard line between what's on the PS4 and what's on the PSVR. The two devices would benefit from a steady stream of established games moving between them: PS4 games to PSVR or PSVR games moving to PS4.

Well since we're mentioning Xbox in a Sony thread, what's the problem with MS having one single advantage next year?.

I mean you have VR, tons of games, better multiplats than X1, what's the harm in them getting one slight advantage for a partial few months?.

This thread isn't about XB1. I'm only referencing that to show a possible reason it would be a good idea to do what I'm saying. 'What's wrong with MS having one single advantage next year?' I mean, come on, how can you possibly reinterpret my intent in such a ridilulous way?

I know but you directly mentioned XB1 in a Sony thread and talked about their disadvantage this year but an advantage for them the next.

All I'm asking of you is why is it a bad thing for you?, why is it bad that Sony gives you what you want and MS gives what their fans want, it's not like having a slight advantage next year is somehow going to win them both the battle and war, that was established 2 years ago.

Yeah what you suggest could also be a good diea but I honestly don't see what it has to do with crushign anything MS is offering their crowd, I mean you're talking about two different crowds but the appealing to one and not the other.

What do you mean 'why is it a bad thing for you'? Where have I said it's a bad thing for me? 'But I don't see what it has to do with crushiing anything MS is offering their crowd.' Where exactly is your head at? We're not on Youtube or on Crapgamer.

This whole MS having a possible advantage in 2017 that you said in your OP.

WHy did you even mention MS and advantage together with the two at all?, what is the issue with MS having an advantage here?.

Crapgamer, the hell is that?.

It's just a point of reference and another possible motive why Sony would want to do this. It doesn't matter how well the XB1 does next year, what matters is it gives credence to what I'm suggesting. The two are separate conversations.

Fair enough, I just don't see why Sony would think they need to do this, they know they have thise gen in the bag.

Ok ... I'll try to put it simply, although there are many other reasons why Sony may want to do this: Scalebound has been delayed until 2017.  Sony will already be considering what their possible line up will be for 2017. Now they know MS has Scalebound and could release earlier in the year, something they haven't been able to do for a while. This means Sony now have to consider what to put up against it, if only to have content available. With VR games already made it seems to me the perfect solution to fill any holes in their portfolio, rather like remasters have this year. It's just another option.

It wouldn't devalue VR because VR is a completely different experience and it isn't going to be exlusives that sell the product, it's going to be THAT experience. Perhaps once VR is established, exlusives will matter as far as competing with Oculus (or any other VR headset) but it's not going to count for much for the first year and a half. Don't make the mistake of thinking the internet and forums represents your average gamer. Wii didn't sell well because it had lots of exclusives, it sold well because it was a new experience with a broader appeal.

It might be a none issue if Sony were competing with MS but they're not now and have stated as much. They're now in competition with the PS2 and they'll do everything in their power to make sure people opt for a PS4. If there's a month when the XB1 has a big game and the PS4 doesn't, it makes sense to make sure PS4 owners have something to play and the media have something to talk about. Regardless though, PSVR has given Sony an opportunity to bolster their portfolio of games for the vanilla PS4. The fact No Man's Sjy is likely going to get a VR version in no way will impact the vanilla PS4 version. The only likely outcome is that those with No Man's Sky already might decide to buy the PSVR later on when they can afford it.