-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Kotaku: PlayStation Boss Wants Change He's Not Willing To Make
- Thread starter Figments
- Start date
Give me more games like Kena, The Medium, Hellblade, Gears 5 Hivebusters, What Remains of Edith Finch, etc.. all day
I don't need (or even really want) 40+ hour games. Particularly when they're long for arbitrary reasons. Sure, there's always room for lengthy gems like Breath of the Wild or The Witcher 3, but I'd much rather play a fantastic, polished, meaningful 8-12 hour game than a mediocre, repetitive 30 hour game.
Not sure why people are so upset at the article.
They literally can't reach hundreds of millions of people with their current strategy, and they've made no indication that they will be drastically changing it in the near future.
In fact recently they seem to be actively against broadening their fan base.
That could change in the future, but as of now that's the reality.
I find it weird so many people are calling this a bad take but in another context all we here when it comes to PS5 is about the "exclusive" games. And how you can only get these experiences on one piece of hardware.
They literally can't reach hundreds of millions of people with their current strategy, and they've made no indication that they will be drastically changing it in the near future.
In fact recently they seem to be actively against broadening their fan base.
That could change in the future, but as of now that's the reality.
I find it weird so many people are calling this a bad take but in another context all we here when it comes to PS5 is about the "exclusive" games. And how you can only get these experiences on one piece of hardware.
Underrated comment, and exactly what was going through my head when I read that.
Does it actually benefit the discussion to enter a thread only to apply blanket snarky criticism to no-one in particular?
So to be clear, your view is that Ryan specified an aspiration he doesn't actually have to bring Sony's games to a wider audience. Why exactly do you think he'd do that? Like what actual benefit would come from stating this goal with no intention to carry through with it?
Only thing from the article that I'm personally feeling is PS Now. I was so excited to hear about Sony picking up GaiKai and it's just a big disappointment compared to what I wanted out of it. I'm still open to giving it a shot, but I'd like to see it improved.
Lmao true. Shits gruesome.
It's one thing to disagree but the people in here will dissect your taste and sniff out every other console you've ever come in contact with that ain't their console of choice.
Gonna need the receipts on that. What's your evidence that they are attracting more audience?
That success is quite modest next to the potential out there, and looking more broadly these machines locking games from users is a limiting factor. I think, or at least i gathered Ryan seems to be slowly accepting that.
It will never end, once something is set here it rarely changes. The Jim Ryan stuff has and will continue to baffle me, I think some people pay too much attention to corporate personalities tbh.
As a subscriber I don't feel this way at all.
They're nearly to 1,000 games on the service and add a few more every month.
That interview echoed a lot of the things Phil spencer was saying like 5 years ago when Xcloud was probably just getting started.
Maybe PSNow cannot scale or higher definition games in the same way Xcloud can but it seems clear to me that Sony is clearly chasing the same rabbit that Microsoft has they maybe just don't have the service to do it right now.
There was a deal a year or two ago between Microsoft and Sony to provide Sony with cloud streaming services.
No question in my mind that he is referring to streaming but they are just not there yet as a company to offer that on a massive scale I'm guessing.
Maybe PSNow cannot scale or higher definition games in the same way Xcloud can but it seems clear to me that Sony is clearly chasing the same rabbit that Microsoft has they maybe just don't have the service to do it right now.
There was a deal a year or two ago between Microsoft and Sony to provide Sony with cloud streaming services.
No question in my mind that he is referring to streaming but they are just not there yet as a company to offer that on a massive scale I'm guessing.
Lol
Potential audience gained by granting access to games on any screen they own >>>>>> audience gained by making games with great looking games with great stories.
You think Birdbox (or any other mega hit from any of the streaming giants) would have have been as big as it was if it was locked behind a $500 box?
I would love to think differently, but until they're offering new games day and date the services aren't going to be comparable.
A man can dream.
I think it's a matter of Sony needing to adopt new technology plus waiting until the right time to reduce loss. The organizations pushing streaming right now are likely losing money to further establish the delivery method. At some point it will make more fiscal sense and that's probably when Sony will go big in their own way.
They make more money than movies and music combined but ok
expensive 500$ box cheap 1000$ smartphone
especially since theres an entire interactivity involved with gaming. no matter how accessible TLOU is in the future there is a large segment of people that will never have the will to play a game like that
I mean, they could make more money sure but it's way more expensive to play a game by a shit ton (at least on PlayStation). Movies, TV shows and music have way more broad appeal because it's easier to access and cheaper.
And everyone has smartphones since they are ingrained in our lives and culture. And even required for jobs, and meetings. Consoles are not and for entertainment & gaming purposes.
you are completely missing the point
Also, smartphones are pretty ubiquitous in part because people aren't using high-end flagship models, they're using old refurbished or low end phones.
This is also 100% true as well. Not everyone gets the highest end models or even buys new. And people generally hold onto them for a VERY long time. I know people who still have the iPhone 5 and 6 daily and a very happy with it
Wat. That entire interview seems like it was designed NOT to stir the pot and help humanise Jim. If anything, it's a case of "look at that bitch eating crackers" that anyone ruffled their feathers over it.
For one-off purchase business models, might this work, but not subscription services. Cloud Gaming Subscription services requires the company to operate at a loss to establish the service. This is how pretty much every subscription service works. Doing it later doesn't reduce losses, it only causes the competitor to eat your lunch. Even if Sony were to enter at a later time, they will still need to establish the infrastructure, MS, despite their MOU with Sony isn't going to do it for Sony.
I'm not interested in the imagined 'vague potential'. Their strategy is to lure people into their ecosystem with great games and it's working. Putting games everywhere is not the only way.
Game of thrones was one of the biggest tv phenomenon of its time, did HBO release it on every platform available known to man or did they keep it to HBO and still found monumental success?
Exactly if something is good the people will come to it. Yes maybe GOT would of had a quote unquote potential bigger audience if it was on network television but then it wouldn't of been GOT as we know it. Sony's games aren't even hitting 50% of the PS userbase I don't think the distribution model is hurting the sales of their games.
I would also point out that games are just as ubiquitous as movies and music already there is just different tiers of it from mobile to high end PC gaming. But it's no different than movies which range from made for TV to 100 million dollar blockbusters.
I just don't see who are these millions of people who want to play HZD but can't because they have to buy a console. It's not the console limiting the reach of the games but I think the games limiting the reach of the console. If you build it they will come as they say. Was the Wii not lauded for bringing in new people into consoles? Did PS not expand the console market? If you present people with compelling software they will buy the hardware.
Actually it wasn't https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/3144382001
This is a list of the ratings for for 2019, Game of Thrones final season.
The first cable show was ESPN's the Last Dance. Also of note, these don't count…you guessed it, streaming. Which is accessible to infinitely more people.
This. If you could listen to that carefully, calculated PR interview and think Jim was trying to "stir the pot" or be controversial in any sort of way, you need to spend way less time on ResetEra because its warping your perspective on the real world.
Exactly. Not every restaurant should be all you can eat either.
If anything i was disappointed it was such a structured by the books "interview". I thought after watching that how i doubt anyone could dissect anything spicy from it and here we are.
not just him, before the start of this gen many outlets tried to paint the idea that if Sony isn't doing what MS is doing them they are going to fail/anti-consumer
Nobody comes to say that Nintendo is wrong for doing their own stuff, and Sony and Nintendo have been extremely successful with their first-party games.
The funny is is that "we" already know some of what Sony is planning to do to expand the market aka mobile/MP/etc strategy. They've literally said it in their financial strategy calls.
Even in the absence of knowing that, a company executive saying that they want their products to be more popular than they currently are isn't like some gotcha moment either.
Tbh this is just another bad Kotaku article.
Sony current strategy simply works and makes too much money.
Streaming simply isn't there yet. Neither are subscription services in the vein of "Netflix of Gaming".
In a few years, sure. Maybe. But right now Sony's/Nintendo's strategy make perfect sense.
And we already know that Sony said they're investing in mobile (and streaming). More is coming.
Sony current strategy simply works and makes too much money.
Streaming simply isn't there yet. Neither are subscription services in the vein of "Netflix of Gaming".
In a few years, sure. Maybe. But right now Sony's/Nintendo's strategy make perfect sense.
And we already know that Sony said they're investing in mobile (and streaming). More is coming.
If there is anyone equipped to make that sort of determination, it's a person on a message board.
It's unfair to get mad at Ryan for not enacting on his ambitions when he hasn't even been there two years; and we're in the middle of a pandemic, a component shortage and a new hardware launch. These things take years and years to take effect, Xcloud was probably in the works for years before announce.
People within SIE's corporate structure absolutely want to embrace streaming in the way Microsoft has; but I'd also bet there's a lot of bureaucracy in between. When you're as big as SIE; and within a corporate hegemony like Sony corp, these things can get convoluted.
Microsoft is nimbler and a software-based company that tends to act as a loss leader. Xbox has never made money in it's 20 year history and has been (Halo aside) mostly a branding exercise.
Sony is a tech company that for right now is predicated on selling hardware and is far more conservative. Playstation is by far their most profitable and valuable asset.
Sony and Microsoft's corporate ambitions, at least right now are very different.
I will also say I don't think hardcore AAA games will ever reach audiences in the hundreds of millions. Games are a very interactive time consuming hobby that inherently turn off some people. Movies and music are more widespread in part because the time investment is much lower.
I think a move away from traditional consoles in a generation or two will expand the audience, but a 30-40 hour RPG like Horizon, or even something like Spiderman, a 15-20 hour game will be a bit more niche than an Avenger's movie.
People within SIE's corporate structure absolutely want to embrace streaming in the way Microsoft has; but I'd also bet there's a lot of bureaucracy in between. When you're as big as SIE; and within a corporate hegemony like Sony corp, these things can get convoluted.
Microsoft is nimbler and a software-based company that tends to act as a loss leader. Xbox has never made money in it's 20 year history and has been (Halo aside) mostly a branding exercise.
Sony is a tech company that for right now is predicated on selling hardware and is far more conservative. Playstation is by far their most profitable and valuable asset.
Sony and Microsoft's corporate ambitions, at least right now are very different.
I will also say I don't think hardcore AAA games will ever reach audiences in the hundreds of millions. Games are a very interactive time consuming hobby that inherently turn off some people. Movies and music are more widespread in part because the time investment is much lower.
I think a move away from traditional consoles in a generation or two will expand the audience, but a 30-40 hour RPG like Horizon, or even something like Spiderman, a 15-20 hour game will be a bit more niche than an Avenger's movie.
User Banned (5 Days): Platform Warring; History of the Same
Firstly PlayStation now exists and already does everything xcloud and game pass do.
And Because "Netflix of gaming" model might not work out due to;
Cost of game production going up, while streaming revenue models remaining low value.
eg Spotify - artists barely make pennies per 100 streams they make their money off touring and live gigs.
Movies and music take less money to make than games. But it can work out for very popular bands because streaming is only one revenue source. They can also lean into licencing their songs for us in movies, adverts etc.
Big single player games cost £150m+ to develop streaming will not recover that.
For a streaming platform to work you need 1 big game releasing every 2 weeks to keep people subscribed.
New movies and shows can be produced in 6 months, game dev takes 3 to 5 years
Only way it could work is if the subscription fee was like £40 a month and that money is then redistributed among devs. But do they just pay the devs a certain amount upfrong? Or per hours played? Contracts can get messy.
Or the company runs it at a loss until they hit critical mass like Netflix, we're talking multiple years at billion+ losses.
Secondly - PlayStation is a more global company operating in countries with poor Internet infrastructure who can't transition to streaming gaming not for at least 10 years.
Thirdly - there will be a decline in quality if first party went day and date streaming.
Think of the quality of Netflix exclusive movies in the early days.
You could clearly tell the difference between blockbusters that had been made for cinema and then went to streaming platforms after the cinema run and the "Netflix exclusives". They were a joke.
I was being sarcastic lol. There's nothing he can do at this point.
