GGTL: What is gaming? What defines a game? According to the The Free Dictionary, a game is "an activity providing entertainment or amusement; a pastime". To me, that definition seems quite blunt, yet we are constantly being bombarded by the now-clichéd "are games art?" debate. For some time now I have sat, rather bemused, listening to and reading the words of opponents and proponents. Often I will laugh at the arguments put forward, but even more often I will enter into a small state of solitude and contemplate what has been put in front of me.
Sammy: "Sony disastrously and disgracefully shuttered Texas-based fan favourite Bluepoint yesterday. The long-time PS Studios partner never got a chance to ship a game under its new parent company.
This news hit me particularly hard because I believe it reflects the erosion of once-great PlayStation management that I think we’ve all been feeling for quite some time."
How was this allowed to happen? A studio know for excellent remakes and remasters were put on a GOW live service game? Something nobody wanted? There are so many other, more interesting projects, for me they were the prime studio who should have remastered or remade Bloodborne, what an absolute waste, I'm really annoyed about this.
Hulst should have followed Jim Ryan out the door, especially after his failed concord brainchild, execs really do only fail upwards.
You say "no body wanted" but we don't actually know if the Devs were the ones to pitch it. For all we know
If that was the case you would have thought Sony would have told Bluepoint no & had them make the God Of War trilogy remake instead while having Santa Monica Studios concentrate on the next God Of War & what ever else they're working on. A Bloodborne remake/remaster would have definitely printed Sony millions. It seems the upper management doesn't care what the fans think including them making awful business decisions. To take Bluepoint under their wing for 5 years & dismantle them is crazy work, Sony should have auctioned Bluepoint off to to a company that could really use them.
If the really did pitch it then they would have wanted their own IP for being a brand new game, not using someone else’s IP when it’s not a remake this time.
I mean I guess, but doubt that a small team of 70 wanted to do a live service game, I don't buy it personally, but we'll never 100% know.
i think you are half right. sony became hyper-focused on live service games and given that, studios would then pitch live service games because those projects were the most likely to be greenlit by the higher ups. now, as for what the hell bluepoint was working on since their god of war game was cancelled is beyond me. it's just increasingly frustrating when sony just announced a god of remake which is still in its infancy when bluepoint could have been working on it for years and likely would have shipped it by now.
We had a god of war mp in the past and it didn’t do well back then with less competition so doubtful people wanted a live service game especially from devs that made some top tier remakes
Copium like this is the reason they're in this position. Sony could do no wrong and when something did go wrong, it's never the corporate suits at sony who are to blame.....its either: devs bad or ms/phil spencer bad while their own backyard is on fire. This is the result of not caring what your fav company does just because another company does (way) worse and automatically condoning everything. I hope they can turn it around without having to fuck over their customers more because especially some of the games on ps1 through ps3 were absolutely amazing.
Can't really say im surprised it's gotten to this point although I didn't expect them to close Bluepoint who has always delivered stellar work.
The devs didn’t pitch it. It’s already been discussed publicly. They had literally just started on a new undisclosed project they were still in the initial ideas phase when they were asked to stop and do GoW instead.
Love the downvotes considering it's since become public knowledge that yes bluepoint DID infact pitch the god of war game. They also eventually pitched a Bloodborne remake but from software torpedoed the project, sadly.
Everyone keeps asking for a Bloodborne remaster or remake — a game that genuinely deserves preservation and modernization. Instead, we got a remake of The Last of Us and then a remaster of The Last of Us Part II, both of which were already recent and widely available. That decision feels tone-deaf. It’s hard not to question priorities when so many legacy titles are untouched.
Bluepoint built its reputation on honoring PlayStation’s history. They were masters at remakes and remasters. There is an entire catalog — from PS1, PS2, and PS3 eras — that fans would celebrate. Yet instead of leveraging that strength, they were redirected toward live service ambitions. Six years later, there’s nothing to show, and now the studio is gone. That’s not just disappointing — it feels like wasted potential.
Sony Bend is another example. Days Gone 2 wasn’t greenlit, and the studio was reportedly shifted toward live service. Years later, that project was canceled, and they’re back at square one. That’s years of development time lost in a generation that already feels light on first-party output.
What’s even more concerning is the broader shift. PlayStation used to thrive on bold, risk-taking single-player projects and strong Japanese creative influence. Now the strategy appears more Western-focused and heavily driven by the live service model — where multiple failures are acceptable as long as one becomes a breakout success.
Competition used to push Sony to take creative risks. The PS3 vs. Xbox 360 era forced innovation. Today, Xbox has shifted direction, Nintendo operates independently in its own lane, and Sony doesn’t feel the same competitive pressure. Without that tension, the urgency to push boundaries seems diminished.
The frustration many fans feel isn’t just about one remake or one canceled project — it’s about a sense that PlayStation’s identity is drifting. And while loyalty is natural, defending every decision without criticism doesn’t help the platform grow.
It’s not anger because we hate PlayStation. It’s frustration because we care about what it used to represent
Jack tretton
Shawn laden
Andrew house
Kaz
Shu Yoshida
These people aren't walking through the doors anymore
It does concern me that they think closing amazing studios like Bluepoint and Japan Studios is smart.
I'm honestly surprised Media Molecule is still around. They put out what 1 game in the past 10+ years? I personally wasn't interested in Dreams, so they have been a wash for me since the PS3 era. Are they working on a new game? What are they doing?
I immediately recalled when they shut down Japan Studio. I don’t understand why any studio would agree to be acquired by Sony, EA, or Microsoft with their history of studio closures.
Because of money. Most game studios need financial backing in order to develop games.
Frustrating news, for sure. Hulst is on a major losing streak. Baffling decisions....
They could of let them do a Remakes of Sly, Jak and Daxter maybe the old Killzone games. Ported Demon Souls to other platforms. Steady revenue for growth becoming a 70 team to 100+ eventually.
Precisely! PlayStation have a rich back catalogue that is screaming out for a talented team like those at Bluepoint to work their magic upon.
Such wasted potential. And a terrible thing to happen to those talented workers at Bluepoint.
Demon's Souls remake was the gateway to FromSoft games for me. I'd fully beaten Bloodborne, but had struggled to get into Dark Souls. Demon's Souls - as a launch title - showed me how these games are meant to be played.
As a PS Fan and someone that looks to new exsperiences not rehashing old ones I can feel for the devs but it does not move the needle as far as getting new video games.
Celebrate the 20th anniversary of Team Ico’s masterpiece by looking back with 11 people who worked on it (and three who didn’t).
Ben from Netto's Game Room takes a look at 7 video games where dying doesn't mean the end, as the story and world simply continue on without you.
I think the question of whether games are art is more dependent on the definition of what art is rather than the definition of what a game is.
You know what games are art now.
Deal with it.
Games maybe art to some but where the is the inovation and uniqueness!
Games can never be art but art can be in games. Thats the way i see it. Take Bioshock the story was amazing but you still had a FPS to play. The FPS gives a gratification aspect which is part of the gaming process. Shadow of the Colossus comes closest to a fully appreciated arty game but there is still a game there which must be enjoyed and played a certain way. Flower is the same. Brilliant art in it and music and include the production of emotions but a game persists and as long as that is the case - games can never be art.
I love good video games like good films and in time i expect games will be appreciated as games because they are fine just like that. It does come down to people's definitions of art though. Some look at modern art and say thats not art. Some people look at the Mona Lisa and feel nothing. There is a case for individual responsiveness to art. Is it art for you? Does it inspire you, make you feel in tune with the world? Games can do this but i think thats because of the art in the game and not the game itself.
I can call games of art, those, that are stylish or with a good story/gameplay/innovations, but not all of them..
examples:
child of eden/REZ (yes, COE isn't out yet, but visuals .. :))
Okami (visuals/story/gameplay)
Muramasa (visuals)
Super mario galaxy 1 & 2 (visuals/innovative locations,gameplay)
Madworld (visuals)
Red steel 2 (visuals)
Beyond good & Evil
Viewtiful Joe
Killer 7
No more heroes
Metal gear series
and many more :)