OnlySP: "Single-player gamers have come to expect a lot from Bethesda... After E3 2018, single-player fans felt cheated, and, on reflection, the disappointments were not unreasonable. So what do players deserve to see that might atone for the mistakes of the past twelve months?"
Well regarded insider, NateTheHate, has said that more Xbox games could be coming to PS5 'this holiday season' followed by Starfield in 2025.
That would be a great game to go multiplat. I would definitely pick that one up on PS5.
That would be an absolutely fantastic score for PSVR2 if they have any VR support plans! MS Flight Simulator (2020) is one of my favorite VR experiences over on PC. Not so much a game, but one hell of a VR experience!
Even if the rumor was true and if that did happen. I still wouldn't play or own a game that is classified as open world just to run into invisible force fields.
Then what is your solution to open worlds that obviously have to have a point where they must end?
If it came to ps+ ill try it, but im certainly not spending my money on it. I wanted this game to be awesome and it just seems so incomplete
Exactly. It's fine to rent it on Xbox so why should they expect people to actually buy it on PlayStation? They don't deserve your money.
send phil, some more dev kits
we need all xbox exclusives games ported before phil shuts them down
We were often ridiculed by Xbox enthusiasts, but it’s essential to understand that Microsoft's $100 billion investment was aimed at generating profit, not merely pleasing fans with Day 1 Game Pass releases.
Microsoft should consider releasing all its games, including flagship titles like Halo and Gears of War, on PlayStation. This strategy would maximize revenue while still releasing games day one on GP, money which could then be reinvested into the future of Xbox. While a few loyal fans might be upset, this approach makes the most business sense in the long run. Even put forza on PS5 get the sales. On Xbox gamers get these games day on GP while other platforms pay full price. Win win
Huh? "We were often ridiculed by Xbox enthusiasts" Its the other way around, their ship is sinking, and they have known this for some time.
Once these acquisitions were announced, many Xbox fans felt that the primary aim was to take games away from PlayStation. Any suggestion that Microsoft wanted to maximize its return on their $100 billion investment was often dismissed with claims that Microsoft doesn’t need PlayStation or Nintendo to profit from these acquisitions.
Historically, Xbox operated independently within Microsoft, for better or worse. However, with such a significant financial commitment, Microsoft's goal is clearly to maximize revenue. They can still release these games on Game Pass at launch and also sell them at full price on other platforms. While some Xbox fans might react negatively if Xbox games appear on PlayStation, from a business perspective, it makes sense to leverage a platform with a much larger install base.
Phil Spencer and his team are under pressure to grow revenue and profit. It is becoming increasingly clear that achieving this growth solely within the Xbox ecosystem is challenging. Many Xbox gamers now expect Microsoft to cover the costs of games through Game Pass, rather than purchasing them outright. Considering that Xbox, now in its fourth generation, accounts for only 15-20% of overall software sales while its competitors are setting sales records, it is crucial for Microsoft to explore broader strategies to ensure profitability.
After its latest games didn't meet sales targets, Square Enix is going multiplatform but the company's track record isn't convincing.
Square Enix been multiplatform for decades, a few exclusively-deals doesn't make them any less multiplatform.
Nor is selling their games on a console with only 25 million install base going to bring their sales to where they hope they will be... Unless they somehow manage to dumb down FF7 trilogy to work on switch, they aren't going to have much luck. They already released it on PC, after all.
It kind of does, giving preference to a certain platform by timed exclusivity. Console ports generally feel superior. Legend of mana PC port extremely broken
Sega
It doesn’t when square themselves didn’t want to fund the development of remake. It’s only after the success of the 1st they realized their mistake but now contract is signed. If it wasn’t for Sony there would be no FF7 remakes. Same goes for silent hill 2 with Konami. They don’t want to fund AAA budget. Companies like PlayStation and Nintendo get blamed when in reality they are saving some of these franchises
Remember sega didn’t want to fund bayonetta and epic games didn’t want to fund another gears of war. It’s easy to blame console makers but they are the ones taking the risk and paying huge upfront costs without seeing the final product. FF7 remake trilogy won’t be coming to Xbox now or in the future. PlayStation and PC is what square signed up for. Sony paid them more than they would make from Xbox sales.
I just wonder when everyone is going to demand that the Square Enix exclusives with Nintendo come to PS and Xbox. Or it's just the PS exclusives that matter lol
I'd love for the nintendo exclusives to come to pc or ps5. They'd actually be playable then.
Raven
Exactly and that’s where square enix does more exclusive than any other platform. Gaming is square has always been very unrealistic with their sales expectations. Remember when tomb raider reboot sold 7.5 million and square said it wasn’t enough. They need to spend less on development and have more realistic expectations from sales.
And those thinking games being not on Xbox makes a difference don’t understand we have a decade plus of data showing square enix games having less than 20% of their multiplatform sales on Xbox (final fantasy series) and Nintendo consoles aren’t strong enough to run any current games. Nintendo switch should be as strong as Xbox one x atleast but we all know that’s most likely won’t happen
@raven
thing is, as neutral said in their comm, the switch isn't strong enough to run flagship SE games
i think what SE does is, it makes unique games for switch only so that it has something for that console too. Thats where all the "underlined sans" rpgs go to mostly
maybe things will change when Swtich 2 drops cuz that's gonna be as strong as ps4 afaik from the rumors flying around
@Scissorman
Your point is valid enough but when the icon of this company is limited to one console in timed-exclusivity, it means the company has crossed the line. By some degree at least
All things aside, Square itself stated "aggressive multiplatform strategies" so we all know what it's talking about
Then the headline should read "Square To Drop Exclusively Deals in Pursuit of A Sweeping Multiplatform Strategy". I don't recall this argument when Square Enix released Bravely Default, Octopath Traveler, and Triangle Strategy on one platform. And even if FF is the icon, not all of its titles have gone to one platform. We're talking about three games, one of which is already on PC. Did Square suddenly go 'multiplatform' after it released subsequent Tomb Raider sequels on more than just the Xbox? It's just a silly way of putting it.
SE needs to go all in optimization. Broken PC ports won't help its case, especially with big releases like mainline Final Fantasy
It's actually simple. What doesn't inspire confidence is Square allocating their budgets on the wrong projects such as Forspoken, Avengers, Babylons Fall and Foamstars.
Square has always been multiplatform since PS3/360 days which 80 % of their games are. People kick up a fuss over PS exclusivity but not Nintendo which has more exclusive projects console exclusive from Square.
FF16 has done ok but not enough to fix the blunders that the past mistakes Square has made with some of their projects. FF7 Rebirth is unclear we'll see a PC release for sure so it's hard to say so far not as good as they would of liked.
Then again unrealistic expectations. If it weren't for Sony these games would at least had another 2 years development time. So some people need to be realistic in that regard.
It's the blunders that set those expectations so high. If you remove those from the equation, I bet the sales numbers would be more than stellar. Square believes it's okay to release a pile of risky, middling, garbage because the big boys will ultimately subsidize the cost. Don't worry if Forspoken sells poorly, FF16 will surely sell 10 million copies to balance that right out. Oh wait, it only sold like 4 million. Well that's a disaster. Meanwhile games that sell 2 million units with comparable budgets are deemed successful.
Square Enix just really need to revise its expectations. Maybe consider a change in strategy on dev end as well. Multiplat will help for sure but only good games that are marketed well will sell
Arrowhead Game Studios CEO Johan Pilestedt explains how the studio name comes from a name translation, plus the background on the game title “Helldivers.”
most probably yes, but you never know.
Yes they will
Well I don't expect Elder Scrolls 6, Starfield, or Dishonored 3
So for me, I definitely expect to be disappointed. Hopefully, going in with ridiculously low expectations is good.
More on the new ghost recon and a new ip is fine by me at E3
All I want them to announce is The Evil Within 3. They do that, then I'm happy with whatever else they show off.