MS was really, really, really after that sweet COD revenue. Essentially rent-seeking without having to do any work on their own, aside from making the merger happen. Not sure that there is any other franchise that smells that much of money from them to get too interested in after this.
I initially played Ratchet with Performance RT + VRR, thinking I was getting this amazing visual upgrade. On a whim, I switched to normal Performance mode (no RT), and I actually liked the screen-space reflections better, and the resolution is higher to boot. RT at this stage of its life is so minimalistic that I prefer the more striking (albeit less accurate) visual punch of old-school SS reflections in the game, as they are actually very well done in their own right.
That’s because the new UIs are designed to sneak ads and paid placements into them. The reason they are so coy about letting you customize anything on the menu is because they are designed to steer you towards their marketing.
"Especially when you can essentially keep it for free after your first month if you just do daily searches and Rewards quests."
That is in no way "free". Your time and your privacy being harvested is not without cost.
For fast twitch games like COD and competitive shooters, I can't imagine playing on a cloud streaming device given the inherent lag. Despite the advances in tech, I am not yet a convert to streaming gameplay.
Crazy to think that the split ratio means that there are probably less than 10 million Series X consoles out in the wild. Once Series S becomes irrelevant, the console gap with PS5 will be significant.
Future Game Pass material.
On a certain level, yes. “Sony” isn’t one business suit accountant trying to finagle a Ponzi scheme to get rich. “Sony” and the PlayStation brand are filled with brilliant and passionate directors, thousands of programmers and artists, and many of them are likely passionate gamers. Even the system architect (Cerny) is a gaming legend, having developed and advised some amazing games in his time. Heck, compare the heads of Insomniac of Naughty Dog, and tell me that they only thing they care abo...
The new generation is a more logical jumping off point to adjust costs. Inflation is a constant process, but gaming consumers would find it odd to have game prices increase by $2 each year.
The common man will better rationalize/understand that a PS5 game costs more than a PS4 game, even if the costs are spread across all platforms. Can also make the argument that higher sales volume will constitute the ability to accept a lower price to generate the same revenue.
Pay for what you want. Inflation and the gradually falling value of the dollar are processes that will always play into reality.
Unless the game mechanics are directly tied to some essential online/live function, there is no reason that, upon sunsetting in 5 or 10 years (if game popularity significantly wanes) that it can't be modified to function offline.
This is what I expect to occur with Gran Turismo 7, as I think the "always-online" aspects are tied to the car markets, credit system, and anti-cheating measures. Once the game is no longer financially significant to Sony (like whe...
This game could really use twin-stick support. On PS Vita, you were able to map the face buttons to the right stick... can't seem to find a way to do this on PS5. Anyone have any luck?
Apples and oranges there. VR and 3D are only marginally related. VR is about complete immersion.
Ah, good catch.
Two different concepts. The issue here is the risk of monopolization within industries through consolidation and gatekeeping. Which leads to the stifling of competition. Twitter is merely changing hands, not being swallowed under a larger social media umbrella.
To fit your point better, MS buying Activision would be like if Facebook bought Twitter or Instagram.
Exactly this. Gamer expectations when the Vita launched were dramatically higher than in the PSP era, and the level of time, people, and financial investment to try and support two consoles with that caliber of gaming wasn’t feasible for Sony at that time. Or at least, not without a strong ROI, which the early Vita sales quickly extinguished hopes of. Sony would have had to split their development team resources to churn out exclusive IPs and not just “cut down ports”. Sony made a big gamble ...
I can honestly say that battery life is not a big concern for me as I tend to play it near a power source. If you're frequently away from any power (airplane/train/bus) that's probably a concern, but I think we often catastrophize the need for hours of battery... myself included.
And heck, many forms of public transportation are offering power at your seat.
Agreed. This is probably my favorite co-op game. Playing with a close friend made this a tense but rewarding experience, even though the RE universe/setting was a bit different. The marsh level is still up in there as one of my most memorable co-op experiences.
Would love to see a Resident Evil 0 reboot that scraps 90% of the original game and more closely follows the exploits of Bravo Team in/around the mansion. This would kill two birds with one stone by; A) downgrading the need to do a full-on RE1 Remake in the same vein as the other reboots (since you could cover most of the Spencer Mansion by following Bravo Team members), and B) fix the awful story arch of RE0 and course-correct it to be more grounded and interesting.
It's revenue, which means profit could be zero or even negative. Even at $1B profit per quarter, it would take 15 years to make back the merger cost....
I thought they were making more on subscriptions than that?!