By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Will Sony Copy Microsoft and Make Playstation a 3rd Party Publisher?

 

Will Playstation also go 3rd party?

Yes 30 35.71%
 
No 54 64.29%
 
Total:84
BraLoD on 29 July 2025
Shaunodon said:
RolStoppable said:

That's like saying everything is an EA box, Square-Enix box, Capcom box etc. Sounds ridiculous because it is.

As for the topic, Sony is definitely making decisions that follow in Microsoft's footsteps, although at a slower and more careful rate. It doesn't make sense though. For Microsoft it did because they suck as a console manufacturer and can't sell an adequate amount of hardware at an adequate price to make it all profitable. But Sony was and is in a position where they can clear the 100 million threshold for hardware sales which is a huge base for a closed ecosystem. Even when the hardware itself is rarely sold at a profit at any point in the lifecycle and even when the first party output has a dry spell, the large installed base generates sufficient profits with third party royalties from game sales and microtransactions as well as Sony's own subscription tiers. It's right there in the financial reports, after all.

The move towards third party publishing is a very risky one for Sony because it threatens their console business and therefore the profits it generates from it. The gains from third party publishing may very well be offset by shrinking console sales and a diminished ecosystem, so Sony's management is acting shortsighted. But they already did when they issued their GaaS strategy, so it's not shocking that they would make another mistake. They are once again chasing a higher risk, higher reward scheme while giving up on a winning formula that has lower theoretical profits but is much safer to accomplish and sustain.

I actually think it's the opposite. Chasing third-party sales is the much safer and more surefire return on investment, which is what Sony has always done with their console business. Chasing GaaS was all about market trends and believing they could monopolise it, but it backfired spectacularly.

Nintendo have proven that building your own exclusive market built on quality brands and unique development actually has more potential, but it also requires generations of building a unique identity and establishing a large foundation of developers and development quality, which neither Sony nor Micorosft have the patience or skill to do.

Now both of the corporate controlled platforms who let their brands that once had potential wither away, are having to accept their fate in the larger pool of AAA multi-platform blandness, where the bubble of outragous development costs and cycles has already popped, and everyone is questioning where their future is.

Meanwhile Nintendo are the one brand in gaming that has insulated themselves from all the madness and uncertainty, with a self-reliant and sustainable ecosystem that isn't at the whim of lazy market trends. They are now able to capitalise further on their brand value with expansions into other markets like movies and theme parks which have already been massively successful, while their stock price continues to soar. All of it within their control, they reap all the benefits.

Nintendo's path has required a lot more risk, since they couldn't rely on a major mega-corp to just buy anything they wanted, but the return on investment has been vastly superior.

Insane to have to read stuff like this in 2025.

Sony is the company that has the most awarded games constantly, some of the very best dev studios in the world, and yet they don't have the skill and their brands withered away?

What am I even reading?

Gran Turismo, PS1 franchise, still selling 15M copies currently.

God of War, PS2 franchise, selling 15M+ copies currently.

Uncharted, PS3 franchise, sold 15M+ copies with its last game.

The Last of Us, PS3 franchise, 2 games, sold 30M+ copies.

Horizon, PS4 franchise, 2 games, sold 30M+ copies.

Spiderman, PS4 franchise, 2 games, sold 30M+ copies.

Ghost, PS4 franchise, 1 games with 10M+ copies sold, sequel about to come.

Has influential/important games like:

ICO: Miyazaki himself said the souls subgenre wouldn't exist without it.

Shadow of the Colossus: pretty much Elden Ring before it, ridiculously influential for open world and silent story telling on games.

Demon's Souls: created that whole subgenre.

Little Big Planet: Mario Maker way before Mario Maker.

Sony games are still extremely relevant, long lasting, high quality franchise that are also huge sellers, to the point of hardly any other company being able to challenge it.

The thing is, Sony is constantly creating new franchises and not only relying on the same stuff.

Astro Bot is last year's goty and it just had its first "proper" game release...



Link: www.facebook.com/FernandoGuadixartworks/

Around the Network
Hardstuck-Platinum on 29 July 2025
BraLoD said:
Shaunodon said:

I actually think it's the opposite. Chasing third-party sales is the much safer and more surefire return on investment, which is what Sony has always done with their console business. Chasing GaaS was all about market trends and believing they could monopolise it, but it backfired spectacularly.

Nintendo have proven that building your own exclusive market built on quality brands and unique development actually has more potential, but it also requires generations of building a unique identity and establishing a large foundation of developers and development quality, which neither Sony nor Micorosft have the patience or skill to do.

Now both of the corporate controlled platforms who let their brands that once had potential wither away, are having to accept their fate in the larger pool of AAA multi-platform blandness, where the bubble of outragous development costs and cycles has already popped, and everyone is questioning where their future is.

Meanwhile Nintendo are the one brand in gaming that has insulated themselves from all the madness and uncertainty, with a self-reliant and sustainable ecosystem that isn't at the whim of lazy market trends. They are now able to capitalise further on their brand value with expansions into other markets like movies and theme parks which have already been massively successful, while their stock price continues to soar. All of it within their control, they reap all the benefits.

Nintendo's path has required a lot more risk, since they couldn't rely on a major mega-corp to just buy anything they wanted, but the return on investment has been vastly superior.

Insane to have to read stuff like this in 2025.

Sony is the company that has the most awarded games constantly, some of the very best dev studios in the world, and yet they don't have the skill and their brands withered away?

What am I even reading?

Gran Turismo, PS1 franchise, still selling 15M copies currently.

God of War, PS2 franchise, selling 15M+ copies currently.

Uncharted, PS3 franchise, sold 15M+ copies with its last game.

The Last of Us, PS3 franchise, 2 games, sold 30M+ copies.

Horizon, PS4 franchise, 2 games, sold 30M+ copies.

Spiderman, PS4 franchise, 2 games, sold 30M+ copies.

Ghost, PS4 franchise, 1 games with 10M+ copies sold, sequel about to come.

Has influential/important games like:

ICO: Miyazaki himself said the souls subgenre wouldn't exist without it.

Shadow of the Colossus: pretty much Elden Ring before it, ridiculously influential for open world and silent story telling on games.

Demon's Souls: created that whole subgenre.

Little Big Planet: Mario Maker way before Mario Maker.

Sony games are still extremely relevant, long lasting, high quality franchise that are also huge sellers, to the point of hardly any other company being able to challenge it.

The thing is, Sony is constantly creating new franchises and not only relying on the same stuff.

Astro Bot is last year's goty and it just had its first "proper" game release...

Why are you surprised with what people are posting? There is literally a thread on the front page right now called "the public suicide of PlayStation". For some reason, it's cool to call PlayStation a failure on this website. It doesn't matter if it doesn't align with reality or not, people apparently enjoy calling the PS5 a failure even though it's not even close to being a failure. 

My advice is, don't waste your energy on long posts replying to people saying this stuff it's not worth it. If they want to call PlayStation a failure with no worthwhile or meaningful game franchises just let them. The great thing about VGChartz is, is that the numbers speak for themselves. You can call PS5 a failure, but failing consoles don't sell 15 million a year



DroidKnight on 29 July 2025
Hardstuck-Platinum said:

Why are you surprised with what people are posting? There is literally a thread on the front page right now called "the public suicide of PlayStation". For some reason, it's cool to call PlayStation a failure on this website. It doesn't matter if it doesn't align with reality or not, people apparently enjoy calling the PS5 a failure even though it's not even close to being a failure. 

My advice is, don't waste your energy on long posts replying to people saying this stuff it's not worth it. If they want to call PlayStation a failure with no worthwhile or meaningful game franchises just let them. The great thing about VGChartz is, is that the numbers speak for themselves. You can call PS5 a failure, but failing consoles don't sell 15 million a year



...to avoid getting banned for inactivity, I may have to resort to comments that are of a lower overall quality and or beneath my moral standards.

RolStoppable on 29 July 2025
Shaunodon said:
RolStoppable said:

That's like saying everything is an EA box, Square-Enix box, Capcom box etc. Sounds ridiculous because it is.

As for the topic, Sony is definitely making decisions that follow in Microsoft's footsteps, although at a slower and more careful rate. It doesn't make sense though. For Microsoft it did because they suck as a console manufacturer and can't sell an adequate amount of hardware at an adequate price to make it all profitable. But Sony was and is in a position where they can clear the 100 million threshold for hardware sales which is a huge base for a closed ecosystem. Even when the hardware itself is rarely sold at a profit at any point in the lifecycle and even when the first party output has a dry spell, the large installed base generates sufficient profits with third party royalties from game sales and microtransactions as well as Sony's own subscription tiers. It's right there in the financial reports, after all.

The move towards third party publishing is a very risky one for Sony because it threatens their console business and therefore the profits it generates from it. The gains from third party publishing may very well be offset by shrinking console sales and a diminished ecosystem, so Sony's management is acting shortsighted. But they already did when they issued their GaaS strategy, so it's not shocking that they would make another mistake. They are once again chasing a higher risk, higher reward scheme while giving up on a winning formula that has lower theoretical profits but is much safer to accomplish and sustain.

I actually think it's the opposite. Chasing third-party sales is the much safer and more surefire return on investment, which is what Sony has always done with their console business. Chasing GaaS was all about market trends and believing they could monopolise it, but it backfired spectacularly.

Nintendo have proven that building your own exclusive market built on quality brands and unique development actually has more potential, but it also requires generations of building a unique identity and establishing a large foundation of developers and development quality, which neither Sony nor Micorosft have the patience or skill to do.

Now both of the corporate controlled platforms who let their brands that once had potential wither away, are having to accept their fate in the larger pool of AAA multi-platform blandness, where the bubble of outragous development costs and cycles has already popped, and everyone is questioning where their future is.

Meanwhile Nintendo are the one brand in gaming that has insulated themselves from all the madness and uncertainty, with a self-reliant and sustainable ecosystem that isn't at the whim of lazy market trends. They are now able to capitalise further on their brand value with expansions into other markets like movies and theme parks which have already been massively successful, while their stock price continues to soar. All of it within their control, they reap all the benefits.

Nintendo's path has required a lot more risk, since they couldn't rely on a major mega-corp to just buy anything they wanted, but the return on investment has been vastly superior.

You have misread my post. I said the same thing you are saying in your first paragraph.

Sony's first big mistake was going for GaaS at the expense of their single-player games. Their second big mistake is to give up exclusivity of their own games.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV will outsell Super Smash Bros. Brawl. I was wrong.

Soundwave on 29 July 2025

I think they figure they can sell 100-120 million Playstations each generation without breaking much of a sweat, but game budgets are rising 3, 4 times.

The sales base is not rising 3 or 4 times with it. So they are seeking more revenue/profit from PC, and maybe XBox and Switch platforms, they can control the exclusivity period (6 months, 1 year, 2 year, whatever).

Sony is a media conglomerate that means when it comes to profit/yearly sales they want to keep revenue and margins growing in line with other such companies like Apple, Samsung, etc. 

That's why their leadership isn't content with just staying as is, they're under more pressure because of the companies they are compared to (Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, etc.). When their sales growth/margins/revenue/net profit are not growing it puts more pressure on Sony's leadership to deliver better results. 

Last edited by Soundwave - on 29 July 2025

Around the Network
Shaunodon on 29 July 2025
RolStoppable said:
Shaunodon said:

I actually think it's the opposite. Chasing third-party sales is the much safer and more surefire return on investment, which is what Sony has always done with their console business. Chasing GaaS was all about market trends and believing they could monopolise it, but it backfired spectacularly.

Nintendo have proven that building your own exclusive market built on quality brands and unique development actually has more potential, but it also requires generations of building a unique identity and establishing a large foundation of developers and development quality, which neither Sony nor Micorosft have the patience or skill to do.

Now both of the corporate controlled platforms who let their brands that once had potential wither away, are having to accept their fate in the larger pool of AAA multi-platform blandness, where the bubble of outragous development costs and cycles has already popped, and everyone is questioning where their future is.

Meanwhile Nintendo are the one brand in gaming that has insulated themselves from all the madness and uncertainty, with a self-reliant and sustainable ecosystem that isn't at the whim of lazy market trends. They are now able to capitalise further on their brand value with expansions into other markets like movies and theme parks which have already been massively successful, while their stock price continues to soar. All of it within their control, they reap all the benefits.

Nintendo's path has required a lot more risk, since they couldn't rely on a major mega-corp to just buy anything they wanted, but the return on investment has been vastly superior.

You have misread my post. I said the same thing you are saying in your first paragraph.

Sony's first big mistake was going for GaaS at the expense of their single-player games. Their second big mistake is to give up exclusivity of their own games.

Which single-player games are they missing compared to their best-selling ones from PS4?

-Spider-Man
-God of War
-Horizon
-Last of Us Remaster
-Ratchet & Clank
-Demon's Souls (in lieu of Bloodborne)
-Ghost

Games which did almost nothing original and followed market trends of the time. Them going for GaaS was just a continuation of that methodology.

Even with sequels to those series, even with moneyhatting several notable games each year, even with Xbox nosediving and losing it's marketshare, PS5 is selling less than PS4 launch-aligned.



xboxgreen on 29 July 2025
Shaunodon said:
RolStoppable said:

You have misread my post. I said the same thing you are saying in your first paragraph.

Sony's first big mistake was going for GaaS at the expense of their single-player games. Their second big mistake is to give up exclusivity of their own games.

Which single-player games are they missing compared to their best-selling ones from PS4?

-Spider-Man
-God of War
-Horizon
-Last of Us Remaster
-Ratchet & Clank
-Demon's Souls (in lieu of Bloodborne)
-Ghost

Games which did almost nothing original and followed market trends of the time. Them going for GaaS was just a continuation of that methodology.

Even with sequels to those series, even with moneyhatting several notable games each year, even with Xbox nosediving and losing it's marketshare, PS5 is selling less than PS4 launch-aligned.

Couldn't said it better myself. Sony realizes consoles are not the future. PC, Mobile, and Cloud are the future. They need to raise as much capital as possible and acquire studios fast. Content is going to be king soon, not hardware.



RolStoppable on 29 July 2025
Shaunodon said:

Which single-player games are they missing compared to their best-selling ones from PS4?

-Spider-Man
-God of War
-Horizon
-Last of Us Remaster
-Ratchet & Clank
-Demon's Souls (in lieu of Bloodborne)
-Ghost

Games which did almost nothing original and followed market trends of the time. Them going for GaaS was just a continuation of that methodology.

Even with sequels to those series, even with moneyhatting several notable games each year, even with Xbox nosediving and losing it's marketshare, PS5 is selling less than PS4 launch-aligned.

They are missing additional entries in these series for the rest of this generation because GaaS blew up in their face. For the same reason they won't have a new IP that will sell any significant numbers. They've already opened the doors to make PS consoles possibly redundant in the future. They've raised the price of the PS5 instead of cutting it quickly like the PS4.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV will outsell Super Smash Bros. Brawl. I was wrong.

Soundwave on 29 July 2025
xboxgreen said:
Shaunodon said:

Which single-player games are they missing compared to their best-selling ones from PS4?

-Spider-Man
-God of War
-Horizon
-Last of Us Remaster
-Ratchet & Clank
-Demon's Souls (in lieu of Bloodborne)
-Ghost

Games which did almost nothing original and followed market trends of the time. Them going for GaaS was just a continuation of that methodology.

Even with sequels to those series, even with moneyhatting several notable games each year, even with Xbox nosediving and losing it's marketshare, PS5 is selling less than PS4 launch-aligned.

Couldn't said it better myself. Sony realizes consoles are not the future. PC, Mobile, and Cloud are the future. They need to raise as much capital as possible and acquire studios fast. Content is going to be king soon, not hardware.

Consoles have a future, but Sony is under pressure to keep growing revenue/profit/margins. 

They can sell 100-120 million Playstation home consoles in their sleep at this point, the problem is game development costs are way higher (lower margins) and not only that there's fewer games per generation they can release. Days of being able to make a sizable game in 2-3 years are largely over, nowadays it takes 4-10 years in many cases for a game to complete, that means they have less content to pull profit from on top of those games requiring larger budgets. 

If you're investing $150-$400 million into a game nowadays it also means you're sitting around waiting 4-5-6-7+ years before you can even get any return on that investment. 

Some of these games if game development begins with a new platform is only say 2 years old, that game very well may not even be completed until the successor console is out these days. That's crazy. 

Last edited by Soundwave - on 29 July 2025

xboxgreen on 29 July 2025
Soundwave said:
xboxgreen said:

Couldn't said it better myself. Sony realizes consoles are not the future. PC, Mobile, and Cloud are the future. They need to raise as much capital as possible and acquire studios fast. Content is going to be king soon, not hardware.

Consoles have a future, but Sony is under pressure to keep growing revenue/profit/margins. 

They can sell 100-120 million Playstation home consoles in their sleep at this point, the problem is game development costs are way higher (lower margins) and not only that there's fewer games per generation they can release. Days of being able to make a sizable game in 2-3 years are largely over, nowadays it takes 4-10 years in many cases for a game to complete, that means they have less content to pull profit from on top of those games requiring larger budgets. 

Why would anyone buy their new console when the previous consoles is sufficient? Not to mention the tariff situation and high costs for computer parts are getting out of hand. PS6 and the next xbox series consoles are going to do worse. People will just stick with what they have and perhaps switch to Cloud gaming.