First off let me say that I have absolutely no proof that this is going to happen. In fact Sony maintains the policy that they are NOT going to do this, but take a ride on the conspiracy train with me for a bit and tell me your thoughts.
Would you pay to play? With the PSN down for more than 3 weeks Sony took a significant hit to their stocks. Add that with the free content being given away and the Identity theft program (which I'm still waiting for) Sony has got to be hurting in the financial department right now. If I know anything about businesses (not saying I do) it's that they never can make "enough" money. Sure a company can make enough money to cover their expenses but they never make "enough" money. So what happens when Sony decides that they need to make up the losses they suffered during the network down time?
Charging for online play.
(Let me state right here that this is NOT Sony's policy, and they have stated multiple times over the years that they do not want to charge for online.)
But let's imagine for a second that they do start. They could say something like 'Due to the new and increased security on the PSN our operating costs have increased unexpectedly. It is due to this reason that we are forced to start charging for PSN online play...' If they did this would you pay for it? If you would how much? $5 a month or $50 a year? But hey since we're riding the crazy train let's go to the next stop.
Playing to pay games.
(Again I have ZERO proof that this will happen. In fact I can't even think of a reason why this would happen, but it certainly is possible.)
What would you do if Sony started charging you to play games. Impossible you say? No. Let's think about something for a little bit, how much control does Sony have over the PS3? Probably a lot more than you think. Yes they can block out your online ability, but can they block more than that? Yes. Before you say "no" think about it. With each update they change the operating system on the PS3. On update took away backwards compatibility, one update changed the XMB, one update made it so the PS3 can auto shutdown. Whose to say that Sony can't make it so that you have to pay to use your PS3?
Finally again, this is all just speculation and with no credible evidence to support this.
If Sony started charging you play your PS3 would you pay? What if Microsoft start charging you to play your Xbox? What if all the gaming companies started charging? Would you pay to play?
Nagoshi Studio’s YouTube channel with the Gang of Dragon trailers appears to have been removed following reports that NetEase will stop funding.
Dear team,
Xbox has always been different.
We started with a simple idea. Games should bring people together through shared experiences. That led to the first Xbox in 2001, Xbox Live in 2002, and new ways to connect, from friends lists and achievements to parties and play across devices. Today, Xbox reaches over 500 million players around the world, with some of the most important franchises in entertainment.
re-evaluating exclusivity 💀
PS players will need to go back to pretending to dislike Xbox games
Or meaning since it’s doing so good they might just do everything day 1.
They didnt say re-evaluating their multiplatform approach.
🤣🤣🤣 Xbox is so dead. I know you scared🤣🫵ӿ 97;
Even when the topic is strictly Xbox he can't stop talking about PlayStation. Xbox has basically become the hate of PlayStation... and not much else.
Hurt over video games 🤣🤣
Lmao we all grew and got jobs but apparently you stayed home broke 🤣🤣.
Man I love loyal dogs like you. MS kicked Spit and slapped you around but you still come back on all 4s.
Good little boy 🤣🤣
My only question is what games are PlayStation gamers gonna play now? They don’t really come out with new games anymore. I’m looking forward to wolverine, but after that then what?
Lmao
There’s no way after everything it’s going back, the damage is done
What you are seeing now is the new management telling what the core fanbase (aka…you) want to hear so they are pumped full of hope and are more likely to invest in the next Xbox console
When Phil took over after the awful Xbox One reveal he did the same thing, he told people what they wanted to hear for damage control.
It’s crazy people are getting suckered into this again.
FWIW..... wasn't the new management speaking to the other staff.... not so much us (regular folk)?
And you'll now go back to again thinking exclusives suddenly matter, that multiplatform is no longer the future, or that revenue from multiplatforms doesn't matter, like all you flop flopping xbox grifters lol.
The whole post just sounds like the previous phil corpo slop talk to me, whole thing reads like a nothing burger lol.
“re-evaluating exclusivity”
She also said this.
“The model that got us here won’t be the one that takes us forward.”
I don't know if they have a model anymore it's flipped so many times since the xbox one reveal
There's a bunch just like him but that's what happens when some rely on dreams, hope and wishful thinking. lol
"pretending"? Bro gears hasnt broke 1mil on ps5, and starfield hasn't passed 200k, Hellblade 2 was even stated to be a financial disappointment in sales on its own console, let alone ps5. Im not saying people don't like them, but they certainly aren't setting the community on fire, Forza may be different tho
Xbawx is ''re-evaluating exclusivity''... Translation: After throwing all sort of crap to the wall to see if something sticks but clearly nothing worked, we, including our lord ''in charge'' Phil came to the conclusion that exclusives indeed do matter so please forget if we ever said otherwise.
Yup, I feel it in my gut, next gen belongs to xbox, PS6 is cooked...
Someone can’t sleep after those 5 million forza games PURCHASED by PlayStation owners🤣 🧌 💥
Well with the decreased price of gamespass even with cod off it there is no way it is profitable given the cost of making their 1st party games (not if you actually include that cost in gamespass costs which they typically dont but should) they will just make a loss without the sales on
If they go back to exclusive games it at least shows that they are finally getting it. They would be turning down immediate money for something that will potentially workout in the long term.
Only issue is they've already opened Pandora's box. A lot of their base has moved to PC or jumped to PS. So will be a long road to get back on track.
We have been saying this from day one exclusives are a must if you are going to be selling hardware look at Nintendo and Sony before Jim Ryan. That's the proven formula. You had some that were deluded and blinded by loyalty accepting that multiplat was the future and that MS was merely getting ahead of where the industry was headed, but at least they can finally see the light and agree with what everyone has been saying for a decade+
True, blame it on the rabid fanboys. MS can do no wrong and spinner this multiplatform move. While the actual fans moved on.
I feel like with the new Xbox coming they are hoping to bring back those old fans and then if it goes well. Bring back exclusives.
If the new console is performing like series x and one. Naw they staying multiplatform.
Actual fans dont move on... they can add to their hobby while waiting for the next new release. If you believe what you typed then I guess PS fans moved on too.... you know, since its been a Sahara for 1st party games this gen.
Funny world where Sony is pro consumer and Xbox is not? At least according to what you loyalists have been saying all this time 🤭
@itveds For how many years have you been doing this sad stuff? For how many years have you been creating fake accounts to troll? For how many years have you always been cl vnn
Pathetic incels with nothing better to do than argue over a box... Because they don't have any good games to play on theirs, obviously. If your precious box is so special, why don't you shut the fuck up and go play it?
I think it's too late, xbox sales were diving even before ABK, they got even worse since then even long before the full multiplatform push. I'd be surprised if they even went back to timed exclusivity at this point, Helix is basically a PC and is going to be expensive, they already struggle to sell cheaper xbox consoles, it will be low volume and they'll have a very small 'console' base to sell to, which has already been conditioned to just play via gamepass anyway.
I don't see them removing PC from the equation. Considering MS has a heavy enough investment in the PC market, it would be foolish to abandon them. I could see them taking away games from PlayStation or ensuring they are timed exclusives at the very least. Say what you will but if Call of Duty ends up becoming a timed exclusive to Xbox machines, that would hurt PlayStation, don't pretend like those games don't sell millions.
They would lose out on a lot of CoD sales tho. Doesn't PS make up most of the sales?
Their lifeline of solely the Xbox consoles is dry. Good-Great games on a 1st party scale can't be made at a loss so willingly - sent to the Xbox to only sell limited copies.
They invested billions scooping up studios and need to start making returns.
Sucks that nearly every company is publicly traded and have to be so shareholder biased but that's how it is.
Their words are strong but it'll take time to see what their actions accomplish. Lowering the cost of Game Pass and taking CoD off of it was a good clear start.
More like, allot of their base just played game pass. So now they need to encourage them to start buying again.
Despite all of that, it's clear that Microsoft's Xbox division is broken beyond repair.
PlayStation is currently draining money on flop after flop. It's Sony that needs to re-evaluate their strategy
Wonder how much money was lost on perfect dark, hellbalde 2, 300 million lost revenue
by putting cod on gamepass. The recent Jason schrier news that Xbox has cancelled dozens of projects, spent 70 billion just to see Xbox sales further collapse and gamepass see little growth.
The fact is this has been PlayStation's most profitable generation and they are making loads of money and selling plenty of consoles and games. While MS won't give you any sales figures or profit numbers for Xbox, says it all really.
It isnt. But I dont think they mean in 'games', rather, footprint.
They own the OS but as far as gaming is concerned, Steam dominate. I imagine the VAST majority of people who use the Xbox app/launcher are PC gamepass subs. No ones buying their 3rd party PC games through Xbox PC.
Insider Gaming writes: "Marathon was one of the best-selling video games in March 2026 in the United States. On Wednesday, Circna released the best-selling games of the month, and it featured six new releases along with two games returning to the top 20 after previously falling out."
Is it April fools day again?
The game is dead.
EDIT: the numbers are fudged. “digital sales on Nintendo and Xbox weren’t included in the data”
well it's not on Switch / Switch 2.. so their number would be zero.
The game had a decent launch however the userbase numbers are dwindling on Steam.
“ Is it April fools day again?
The game is dead.
EDIT: the numbers are fudged. “digital sales on Nintendo and Xbox weren’t included in the data”
Does it hurt you to hear a SONY game was BEST selling ?
You gotta let go of those OBCURED feelings 🤷🏿
I mean the only reason MLB was the best selling title was because it was multi-platform. Likewise with Marathon. Will ring true for MS games. Only Nintendo titles are truly flexing their muscles when they chart as they are only to be found there.
It's kinda funny how this Obscure guy lives rent-free in your head. lol
Does Phil also live there?
It's kinda funny how this Obscure guy lives rent-free in your head. lol
Does Phil also live there?
I’m sorry did you wrote something smart ?
Or are you trying to to be funny because you failed at both
Now kid run to mommy legs the grown ups are talking.
Don’t bother writing anything I will not respond to a bratty child like you
Yeah sure, yet the player count is no where near what they want for a AAA game with so much money behind it
Why people are trying to spin this game like it’s done overly amazing is baffling to me.
It won’t even be a blip on peoples radars by the end of the year .
You must me typically wrong cuz those Steam chart numbers (AKA where the game sold the MOST) is less than what Hunt has, and Hunt didn't cost $500 million to make lol
I would only pay to play on PS3 if Sony offered a better online service. They've increased their security and I get that that has cost them money, but from what we've heard so far their security measures beforehand weren't at the level they ought to be so I don't think it'd be fair for them to charge us because of this (I don't think they will, since as you've stated Sony have always been adamant that PSN will always be free).
But yeah, if they offered a better service with more options (such as cross-game chat among other things) then I'd certainly consider it.
Its entirably reasonable, if they promise Xbox live level quality, paying will be more than justified.
Sony is aware that some people will pay to play, and some wont. MS understands it too, which is why the tie 3rd party non-gaming services to XBL.
Nevermind that MS has yet to absolutely prove that XBL could withstand a cyber attack similar to the one PSN suffered. Single XBL accounts are often fully compromised, you just don't hear about them. They aren't as news worthy as someone getting ahold of 70 million names and addresses.
I would pay because most of my games are for PS3 and I wouldn't want to lose online access, but I would not be happy about it. I already pay to play as it is. I buy the games.
From that i mean you have to go back to when the notion of live was conceived and launched. There wasnt much of a console online system back in early 2000. Sega had their system but unfortunately they gave in to the pressure of hardware/software costs and chose to exit the market.
This left the console online experience open to whoever was willing to commit to making it work. MS entering the console game was the logical choice to start things off in the right direction. Did you think it would be a free ride??? I sure didnt. I was aware of how things worked on the PC side. Sure you had free games to play but others were membership based and required the dedication to play in order to get the return on investment.
MS started off simple yet the idea was sound. Create the backbone to allow for multiplayer gaming around the world and then sell it to the people and developers to make $$$. Nothing wrong with that as this is a business driven world. The release of the 360 sought only to expand on what the original xbox created and they add ALLOT of stuff that was never there in the first place.
Not only that but 90% of the service was made free to those who didnt play online. The key there is "online". The argument of buying a game to have half of it unavailable has been the angle that others against live have been using. So why not look at it from the other side. People who only buy games to play multiplayer arent playing half their game either. That may not be a direct example but it still is an example. There are millions of people who dont play online nor do they even have their consoles connected.
Those that do are more than likely ones who started off with the xbox in the first place. PS2 had a poor online structure and that is a definite must for a connected console to thrive. The $$$ you pay for the year is quite small when viewed over the course of that calendar year. So now lets jump ahead to current time. There is a reason to why Sony came out with their online system in its free state. It still didnt have the structure that was worth charging for.