-
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.
Regarding PC, Sony should do a late-release strategy
- Thread starter laziboi
- Start date
why do you give a fuck and why do you think people buy playstations for a fucking mlb game
User Warned: Platform Warring
You'd think they felt that way with all of the port begging console games.
The question is that good enough for Sony? I think hardware sales are still pretty important to Sony.
Which is why they should do a delayed release strategy. They still sell consoles, and open the game up to more users down the road.
If you ask me, it's already pretty homogenous in the AAA space, so the effect is minimal to me.
Otherwise, you're basically touting the usage of Remasters as a bold new strategy (it's not). If we're going for best strategies, Nintendo has that on lock by basically never dropping the prices of their games ever AND selling exclusive remasters, so your bold strategy isn't even the best one.
It also, more importantly, doesn't benefit me. Them releasing PS ports years later does nothing positive for me and is functionally useless, so I reiterate, why should I care about their business model? You brought up that they should do it this way and I said why they shouldn't. I would also much prefer if I could watch Netflix originals on Hulu as it would cut out my services bill a bunch and having multiple different places to go to only benefits them, not me. I won't complain, but I also don't really endorse it either.
I have seen more portbegging for Alyx to be on the PSVR in the past few weeks than I've ever seen "PC port begging" since I first logged into ERA.
More ports are good but I don't see Nintendo bringing Pokemon and Mario, yet either. It'd require market pressure, which is the only reason Xbox swerved on this. SIE was bringing stuff to pc like Helldivers way back in 2015, before stuff like quantum break were heading to both. 2016 was the beginning of the flip: Xbox embraced cross play and sales, while previous to that Sony did those things when MS wouldn't. Then they wound that initiative all down and have been quiet until fortnite forced their hand. I've no idea what's coming now, other than small experiments like the sie party game that quietly launched on EGS a month ago
Those are third party series that are expected to be multiplatform.
It's always so weird to see people say Sony can't release their games on PC because it would negatively affect their business model. How many people are buying a gaming PC? How many of those people are also buying a Playstation console just for a couple of games?
I really doubt that the number is big enough that Sony would see any hit to their business model. I imagine they would make more money by selling their software to people that only play on PC than the few that own all the consoles.
I really doubt that the number is big enough that Sony would see any hit to their business model. I imagine they would make more money by selling their software to people that only play on PC than the few that own all the consoles.
would be cool, but i don't see them doing it. there's been some changes recently (some not sony's decision) but i don't see them adopting a wider strategy when it comes to PC.
Business decisions IMO, should benefit both the company and consumer equally. Compromise is the key in business, please the customers, but play to your strengths as a business. Late release strategy still has benefit for consumers since the games still come to PC, and perhaps will entice players to purchase a PlayStation 5 to get the full PlayStation experience.
Companies are not a charity, they have to consider what makes sense for their bottom line as well as the people supporting it.
That's not true. There are plenty of threads with PC port begging the last 20 years I follow forums. Alyx for PS4 doesn't need port begging at all. Every HL came to console eventually.
Because business culture interests me, and I believe companies should make decisions that benefit both them and the consumer.
Leave the anti-consumer ideas and practices to the actual companies. There's no point in sitting here trying to figure out ways we think our favourite companies should fuck us over lol
We must protect these struggling companies though. They need us.
It's not anti-consumer though. It's finding a good compromise that benefits both ends. Sony isn't going to sell nearly as many PS5s if they put everything day-and-date on PC, and they're just leaving money on the table if they ignore the PC market completely. There needs to be a good solution in the middle.
I'd rather they devote resources to make making as many high class games as possible. Not making PC ports and either making less games or lower quality ones.'
I really don't give a shit about exclusives for the sake of exclusivity. For Sony iam sure big name popular AAA games are making much more money and moving consoles than their exclusives thus you see them allowing a PC release a year after its PS release for some games. Sony slowly but surely are opening gates for PC versions for their owned games.
Even if Sony isn't MS, they directly compete with MS and see them as their direct rival. If MS has found a new revenue stream on another platform, Sony will absolutely try to cash in and compete with MS on that platform. For them at the end of the day, its money that talks and their investors. They can expand the playstation brand however they want. This one year release strategy is only for now IMO but in the near future expect them to allow more games on PC at least, idk about other consoles.
Yes it does depend on exclusives but pretty less as to how you're thinking about them. Sony's business depend a ton more on big name AAA multiplatform games than exclusives. Seeing Sony's lenient behavior to PC only ensures that.
Even if Sony isn't MS, they directly compete with MS and see them as their direct rival. If MS has found a new revenue stream on another platform, Sony will absolutely try to cash in and compete with MS on that platform. For them at the end of the day, its money that talks and their investors. They can expand the playstation brand however they want. This one year release strategy is only for now IMO but in the near future expect them to allow more games on PC at least, idk about other consoles.
Yes it does depend on exclusives but pretty less as to how you're thinking about them. Sony's business depend a ton more on big name AAA multiplatform games than exclusives. Seeing Sony's lenient behavior to PC only ensures that.
This. Unless Sony introduces its own PC gaming client like Microsoft, there's no reason for them to do day-and-date releases.
Sony sell consoles (at a loss most likely) in order to generate revenue from games, licensing, and accessories.
Gamers who main on PC or Xbox console buy a PS5 only for exclusives, they wont buy accessories or 3rd party games, in this case Sony takes a hit on the console sale but generate money on the 1st party software.
Now let's say Sony do PC as well, this wont make a different for the Xbox guys, but they still end up selling their software to the PC crowd without the hit on the console sale. Plus they reach a bigger audience who would not have bought the console anyway.
Gamers who main on PC or Xbox console buy a PS5 only for exclusives, they wont buy accessories or 3rd party games, in this case Sony takes a hit on the console sale but generate money on the 1st party software.
Now let's say Sony do PC as well, this wont make a different for the Xbox guys, but they still end up selling their software to the PC crowd without the hit on the console sale. Plus they reach a bigger audience who would not have bought the console anyway.
Of course, Sony should support the PC with their games because they'd be stupid not to support it in some form. But it should be done in a way that makes sense for their business model. Ergo, releasing some of their best selling first party games on PC a few years after release is the most ideal strategy for them.
What is the 'Full Playstation Experience' that I'm missing out on if I don't buy their console? Paying for Internet use, weaker performance and an extra box? Doesn't sound mutually beneficial to me. Hell, even in your example, the 'benefit' is that people may just buy a PS5 anyway. How is that any different from now?
Customers aren't charities either and this hypothetical scenario massively benefits Sony over the Customer, so what exactly am I supposed to be enticed by other than 'I guess I have no choice', which is where we already are?
ok, some expansion packs for the first game didn't come. Sorry.
I always thought these releases were intended for collectors and not some kind of time exclusive thing.
You are aware that Sony making PC ports won't lower the quality or amount of games they put out right? If a PC port somehow got in the way of development they could easily outsource it to a different team or studio.
Yes, because releasing a bunch of old games on PlayStation Now made the service such a huge success, so let's similarly offer our new audience on PC a bunch of old games, too, right?
Well you get access to the features that are only possible on PS5 for one. And you get new first party games the day the officially release instead of having to wait a 1-3 years for their PC release. The point of a delayed release strategy is to give PC users a taste of what you can find on PlayStation platforms to entice them to buy your console.
Sony needs to sell consoles, and they need exclusives to do it, but they should also do it in a way that doesn't completely lock people out either.
The difference is that PS Now is filled with last generation PS3 games. Meanwhile Horizon, if the rumors are true, would only be 3 years old by the time it hits PC. That's the way to handle it. Bring over select games 2-3 years after release to drive sales of PlayStation hardware.
lmao all this over a Baseball game.
Yall take one thing and just completely run away with it into fantasy land.
Yall take one thing and just completely run away with it into fantasy land.
You assume that, but the two devs/publishers that can pump out high quality games on a fast/semi fast pace are sony and nintendo and both focus on one platform primarily.
They're stand alone releases. They're not expansion packs "for the first game." You don't need to own half life 1 to play either game. As opposed to, say, needing Age of Empires II for its expansion. They're actual full games in the Half Life universe, which tie into the story. The very first character you see in HL2 is Barney from Blue Shift.
Yeah, right now, big name multiplatform AAA is more important for Sony than their exclusives. Sony 1st party game is not at the level of Nintendo's IP like Mario and Pokemon than can sell millions of copies at full price even years after game is released.
But multiplatform games are not reliable, just because Activision is having deal with Playstation right now, doesn't mean it will always stay thag way. Especially if it become bidding war with MS.
Sony should have tried to keep expanding and refining their 1st parties until they can reach Nintendo level where people will buy the hardware for Sony games
There's probably some cases of this, like those big VHS looking special editions of Stranger Things, but I doubt like Season 1 of Narcos on Blu Ray at Best Buy or Walmart is being sold to some niche collectors market. They are intended at maximizing their audiences. Netflix probably understands that not everybody has a Netflix subscription. Im not saying they sell well, but there must be a market for them.
Sony has said before that Exclusives are very important to them in terms of selling consoles. Them releasing a few games on PC doesn't change that fact.
This happening is as likely as the same as Nintendo leaving the software game rediculousness that pops up all the time. Pure wishful thinking.
Half-Life: Blue Shift is an expansion pack for Valve science fiction first-person shooter video game Half-Life.
Half-Life: Opposing Force is an expansion pack for Valve's science fiction first-person shooter video game Half-Life.
yeah they have and they will continue to say that. But how do we know if not most of it is just PR because they want to convey to their customers buying their consoles that they give them 100% priority when it might not be the case?
Sony at the end of the day is a business, them lying or not being truthful regarding these things is not a big deal so i don't take their words at face value any more, same with other big corporate companies that are out to satisfy their shareholders.
Except Sony owned exclusives like Journey, Detroit, Death Stranding and Helldivers all got PC ports and that never had any effect on their exclusive output or quality.
Given how quickly people fell off of Horizon as a result of some of the other game releases in the same year, I don't think you'd want Sony waiting 2-3 years to release a PC port of a game. If you think the marketing for the launch of the PlayStation TV (Vita TV) was a sad state of affairs, then just wait until you see how Sony would send a three-year-old PC port of a game to die.
They're stand alone games. Calling them an expansion pack, is like calling Half Life Episodes 1 and 2 expansion packs. The term "expansion pack" is an antiquated term from an era where "game engine" wasn't a well used term.
If you'd kept reading the wikipedia articles you are quoting from:
