What's wild about this comparison is Sega basically did Gamepass in the 90s. Look up the Sega Channel. It's absolutely wild that it happened.

Yeah you're completely right. It's too bad that PC gamers have to have a weird fetish for Valve though. Valve doesn't even make fucking games anymore. I feel like a storefront cut makes more sense to go to a company that would at least take *some* of that and reinvest it in games; that's basically the console value proposition in a nutshell but in theory it could all be done on PC so the best of both worlds could be achieved.

Subscription services have been nice for gamers in the short term when companies loss lead to provide value. But long term, it has to be value destructive. Either the subscription maker is screwing over developers by giving them a smaller cut in a future where people just subscribe instead of owning (basically they'd have all the cards to negotiate when they train consumers to just wait for it to appear on ps+ or gamepass) or they have to raise prices enough such that you'd just save money buying and supporting the games you want to play.

The money has to come from somewhere, and they will want to pursue margins on it in the end. Those margins will precisely be a value loss for all consumers because we are either paying more for the same product or the people who make games will be getting less and therefore be making less games for us.

I don't have loyalty to any particular box. I just love video games. Tango was a good studio and Hifi rush is a great game and it's not okay for people's lives to be ruined when they make a great product like that. These executive types get to ruin lives and experience wonderful lives due to their incredible compensation. It isn't fair. They should experience some mild harm so they maybe think twice before ruining peoples lives over some malformed KPIs.

Sorry, I think you misunderstood me, Sony *got* sucessful by being diverse past tense; now they just are coasting on inertia. Look at PS1/2/3 and you see an incredibly diverse lineup of games. PS4 was that diversity dying but still existing with bangers like Gravity Rush 2 and bloodborne, and that's enough for the brand to have power and momentum.

I'll totally concede that they are creately bankrupt now (well except for Returnal, that is a great game), but if MS wants to overthrow them, they need to create a catalogue that rivals the PS2 because that's the type of thing that breaks all barriers of platform inertia and causes everyone to just throw everything else in the garbage and switch to that platform.

Yeah I think so but he won't. To my memory, shuttering of Tango is the worst gaming atrocity done I can think of. Specifically when it's juxtaposed against their aquisition spending. There is no way it's acceptable to waste billions on aquisitions only to fail to spend a much smaller amount to keep a studio open and making games.

The strategy of it is also non-sensical. How can they be so daft to look at the solitary metrics of a game they themselves prevented sales of with their gamepass platform? Also, any platform, isn't succesful on one game, it's successful on a large array of games that causes people to say "you know what, these 10 games are enough I'm buying an xbox!". Historally Playstation and Nintendo succeeded when they created a large collection of diverse games and then the network effects from those took over from there. Hi-Fi rush is a perfect example of the *start* of something along those lines; but you can't do it with just one. They really really needed like 5 of these level of games to come out a year and then bam, they'd probably be able to beat Sony given they are slipping on output

Phil and Sarah and the rest should be ashamed. I hope they can't even go to a restauarant in peace without someone telling them to **** off of a staff spitting in their food.

It's great.

Best Crash by far if you just beat it.

Worst Crash by far to 100% it.

Yeah this is it. PC gamers tend to be petty and swear fealty to Valve. I find that strange since the point of PC is it's not locked to one corporation; if you want to swear fealty to a corporation why not be a console gamer where every game gets a cut given to your favourite corporation of choice. PC should be agnostic but it's got a lot of Valve fanboys.

For the economics of Sony being platform agnostic and having all games day and date on PC, they really can't be giving 30% to Valve and beyond that they probably need to make that platform start getting 30% of other games sales. It won't work though obviously but they'll have to try.

If they ever do, it would only be in an environment where they would also create their own launcher and likely their own possibly required PC peripherals to play the games. No way they would or should give Valve a 30% cut of sales or even epic a 10% cut.

I can't see it happening in the next 10 years, but beyond that, well anything is possible and I wouldn't want to make predictions that far out.

There's really no need to strangle a great dev with the burden of dealing with IP. This is the same weather it's Zelda or Star Wars or whatever else. They're a great studio, but that sort of back and forth coordinating with multiple stakeholders is absolutely soul crushing and anyone who has worked in games or just large software corporations in general knows exactly what I'm talking about.

Ironically, for as terrible as they are at making games, this sort of communication is precisely what souless juggernauts like EA are best at doing. No need to taint real artists like From Software with such busywork.

Edit: I saw someone mention Capcom earlier; now that makes sense. They strike a balance of having great developers along with the corporate shell for dealing with this sort of IP busywork. So they could actually make it work.