So Shawn Layden is doing the DICE keynote this year (tomorrow), and CNET has an interview with him before the conference.
https://www.cnet.com/news/sonys-shawn-layden-wants-fewer-bigger-playstation-games/
More at the link about the reasoning of pulling out of E3, streaming, etc: https://www.cnet.com/news/sonys-shawn-layden-wants-fewer-bigger-playstation-games/
https://www.cnet.com/news/sonys-shawn-layden-wants-fewer-bigger-playstation-games/
Speaking from his office in San Mateo, California, just up the road from other massive game makers like Nintendo and Electronic Arts, Layden didn't discuss the new device [PS5]. But he did say new technologies that could replace home consoles, like game streaming technology similar to Netflix, are still years away from mass adoption.
He also hinted that Sony's ready to buy up other game makers as it looks to expand the types of games it makes.
With games like Fortnite: Battle Royale becoming so popular, how do you decide what types of games to make? Whether it's creating a direct competitor me-too type game or something different?
I don't want to get into me-too, it seems like I think the world's got all the battle royale it needs right now.
I think we've done a lot over the last three or four years to get us to a place right now where we're building fewer games per year than ever before, but we're spending more time, more energy, certainly more money, on making them.
So we're striking on all the beats that we want to, and we're getting both critical and commercial acclaim. Let's see now what we might add to our arsenal. I've looked at some opportunities in the past, it's an opportunity to look for the ones that are the best cultural fit.
How do you decide what game makers you'll buy?
We're always exploring opportunities. If we found a partner or a team or a game that we felt was particularly meaningful and interesting in a service area, we will look to bring that in. We're always open to that kind of experience.
We try to make it really easy for our teams to focus on what our vision is for the future. And we have simplified it to "first, best or must."
If your title is going to be "first" and creating a genre, or "first" and creating a new game activity, let's look at that. If you're going to make an action adventure game, It better be "best" in class. And we have the third category called "must," which is we must support the platform, we must be present when new technology comes out.
And delivered over not-the-internet still as well? The first thing I think about when people talk about even downloadable games is the military -- there isn't always good internet to download games in war zones. They need something you can bring to them in a postage box. But that's challenging. When you were developing the PS4, there was talk about making it downloadable only, but you decided to stick to the disk partially because of these reasons.
I don't know what the timeline is. If the PlayStation continues to grow at this rate, we can leave no gamer behind. But streaming is something that PlayStation is active in and we want to make sure we keep current in that technology.
More at the link about the reasoning of pulling out of E3, streaming, etc: https://www.cnet.com/news/sonys-shawn-layden-wants-fewer-bigger-playstation-games/