Really, I ignored the proportion even though the post you quoted literally says almost half? The only word that matters is less. Less software, less new IP's, less risk. Yes yes we all know bigger games require longer development time. Again, nothing new there, nothing relevant to the point. It's weird that you're confused on this, you've always been one of the more vocal people here about the great variety Sony provides. Now you're fine with Sony just doing AAA titles and buying timed exclusive rights to the smaller stuff.

Also, did the PS5 have "much more" exclusives? I remember three for PS4, I think PS5 also had three if you count the Astro Boy pack in demo?

Out of those, they actually developed the Astro demo, Ratchet (not out yet), and the Spider-Man cross gen add on. The rest are outside studios, which is exactly my point. Also Kena is just a money hat exclusive, that would be like someone giving Microsoft credit for developing Ascent or CrossFire from Remedy. It used to be Sony providing you the big games but also the more niche or smaller scale titles. Now it's going to be Sony focusing on AAA and just paying others for deals on the other stuff. Again, if the rumors are correct.

Except releasing less isn`t equal to less risk, since you also have less opportunities to dillute the risks. Since about half of their titles are still new IP I would say they are taking about the same risk as before but with less releases in total because of more time to release games.

I`m still in favor of more variety which is totally different than not understanding why they have reduced output. Still you received a list of sony games that aren`t AAA already for this gen and that is much more than previous gen.

I don`t remember you being so worried about the lack of exclusives or variety on Xbox over the past 2 gens though, nor you even really caring about all those games from Sony, remind you saying how useless Japanese games were to you.

On the output for first 6 months I sure would need to check PS4 vs PS5, but from memory (and sure PS5 being more recent plays in its favor) I see PS5 being stronger than PS4, I do remember Xbox fans (you probably in there as well) saying X1 launch was a lot stronger in SW than PS4.

Your spin is cute but there's no way to really spin Sony having just as many new IP's during the PS3 era as they did games total during the PS4 era. That's a gargantuan drop in output and risk. Also if you have an inherent risk with releasing a new IP (or any video game in general), the risk is clearly higher the more times you do it. It's just good old fashioned math.

I'm not worried about a lack of variety from MS because they have 23 studios that vary in size and scope and they've shown zero evidence of shifting all 23 of those teams to massive AAA projects. In fact we've seen the opposite, Ninja released Bleeding Edge, Obsidian has Grounded. Double Fine is still doing Psychonauts 2. Undead has still been updating the hell out of SoD2, which is a AA title. etc etc

You are spinning things.

Half of the titles on PS3 were new IPs, Half the titles on PS4 were new IPs. You are just trying to stir problem and you know it. Nope, it isn`t higher the more times you do. Let`s say the risk of failure is 30%, it will remain 30% if you do 5 or 50 times. There is a reason for the saying don`t put all your eggs in one basket, and it is that when you spread things you also spread the risks, so Sony releasing less titles doesn`t directly mean they are taking less risks. If they were just putting sure hit sequels sure you could say it. Also in fact if they are putting more money in each title that actually mean they are taking more risks even for new IPs.

You weren`t worried even before they bought 15 studios, and be honest, MS didn`t create the IPs or studios they bought those, and sure you would be complaining here on VGC if Sony bought that many studios in couple years. As much as people were complaining on rumors of Sony buying Capcom or Konami with rebuttals that it would force MS to buy EA. It is very cool of you.

Bold: To me, this is a null point. You may see a difference in software numbers currently but the position the PS3 and PS4 were in is very different. PS4 was successful very early and sold really fast. PS4 was at 40M when Uncharted 4 hit and almost 80M when GoW hit. PS3 was at 27M when Uncharted 2 landed and 36M when God of War 3 landed. In addition Sony is spending WAY more on marketing this generation than they did during the PS3 generation. They just aren't like for like scenarios, so drawing the conclusion "less software meant greater sales" is not appropriate.

I agree with the premise that you shouldn't barrage your customers with sequels to prevent IP fatigue. That is not an excuse to develop other IP's which can be in house or outsourced. 

The rest: Releasing less titles overall does not mean they are pushing for it as much as they can. During the PS3 era they were also developing games for the PSP (and ported those to PS2) which had prequels/sequels to established franchises and their own IP's. It was only the beginning of the PS4 era that they were developing for two platforms and they dropped that support quick. I don't think Sony is doing everything they can to develop new games and new IP's. I think that they are pouring everything into those hollywood esque AAA story based games and dropping support for smaller new IP's that could become established franchises just as the recent rumors suggest. 

If that is what you like, fine. Enjoy it. This isn't what got me to love the Playstation brand though. 

Hit the nail on the head rather perfectly.

Also, Don, deflecting to MS doesn't make any difference either. I've never been a huge fan of MS games, but I am more so now because of the studios they bought being studios I mostly enjoy. I don't buy Xbox consoles for MS games. However, I do buy Sony consoles for Sony games, because anything else I can play on my Xbox or PC. Also no, IDGAF if Sony buys more studios. You do realize these PS4 new IP's like Ghosts and Horizon are from studios they bought? Who cares.

I didn`t draw the conclusion that less software means greater sales, what I said is that even with less software released they achieved more sales, because they have sold much more SW even if less released. Sure we don`t know if they had released double the SW if they would have sold double the number, it is possible they wouldn`t but sure sales would likely grow. We do know that SW sales don`t scale linear or even near it. The higher the HW numbers the lower the attach ratios usually are. Although for the famous IPs someone posted earlier that the attach ratio increased.

Myself I wouldn`t mind if each of my favorite IPs would have year release if they were all of the quality they have done for the few releases (but that wouldn`t happen probably). My biggest point to Ludicrous was that Sony have been taking almost the same risk with new IPs as they were before (half their releases are new IPs), and that releasing less games but with higher cost can actually mean more risk.

We have received lower production type titles as well, and when I say as much as they can that is obviously with caveats like reason. They could open 10 studios tomorrow to make more games, but that isn`t within reason to demand. Sony have collaborations and deals. And not to forget that Sony plan from what they say is to compliment their platform with what is missing, so if they already receive a healthy number of Indies, A, AA and Japanese titles with several genres they don`t really need to make those titles as they don`t need to lose money on those titles as they are covered.

I'm just looking at you trying to look how you look different depending on the context. And it is cool that you buy Sony consoles for their exclusives but usually you only complain about their exclusives.

I'm sure they know what they are doing. I agree they aren't dumb, they are damn intelligent and with more knowledge than anyone here could possibly have

I still don't think they are doing that for profits or to meet some kind of market demand, at least not directly

Not sure I understood your point.