NO STEAM DECK NO PLAY
Steam users are the base everyone desires to get to but no one wants to pay the toll to Valve for building the platform gamers want.
You don’t even gotta do that much, just be a better platform.
Sony has been paying that toll and, per the article, plans to continue to do so.
Am I missing something here?
Turns out most people despise rentiers
maybe because Steam is kind of a shitty platform and valve an abusive landlord. Shocking, i know.
“we’ve built a platform that at least give piracy a run for its money, and used it to develop a massive user base so conditioned to buying from us that they happily joke about how 50% off a game they won’t play is cause for them to buy four times as many. Please, join us all in the baffling orgy of commerce, all we ask is 30% of the treasure.”.
“We will, but we’re gonna try to get the users to come to our platform with less content and maybe a $500 buy-in so we can have a bigger portion of a smaller pie”.
“Lol, go for it”.
“…”.
“…”.
“Why are you being anticompetitive?”God preach here. "Our storefront works half the time, is clunky, bulky, filled with flashy ads and no substance, allows no customization, you can’t add your own games, you can’t run it on Linux, and our games will always assume you’re trying to pirate or hack even when we know you just bought the game. Switch over now! You’ll love it!
The hilarious thing is that Sony could open their own pc storefront selling steam keys, keep their 30%, and the only restriction would be maintaining price parity with the same game on the Steam storefront.
For a. Company like Sony that already has all the payment processing and customer service knowhow, this would be far easier for them than most.
Yet they can’t or won’t bother because suits are fucking stupid.
Shit, I assumed that valve somehow got a cut of games from keys as well, but looking it up (briefly), it looks like you’re entirely right and they don’t.
That makes it even more bonkers that companies keep trying to siphon off the market share, since you could just take your market proceeds as bonus revenue as long as valve got their share of what they sell.
I’m assuming that’s a big chunk of how things like humble bundle make their money?Shit, I assumed that valve somehow got a cut of games from keys as well, but looking it up (briefly), it looks like you’re entirely right and they don’t.
That makes it even more bonkers that companies keep trying to siphon off the market share, since you could just take your market proceeds as bonus revenue as long as valve got their share of what they sell.
I’m assuming that’s a big chunk of how things like humble bundle make their money?Pretty sure generating buttloads of steam keys for resale on a different platform to keep valve from taking their 30% is a violation of steam’s TOS?
Nope. There’s rules about pricing parity but you can generate and sell as many of your own keys as you want.
You can’t actually, they won’t let you generate more keys if you sell fewer units through Steam directly (probably not 1:1, they don’t state precise numbers as it’s up to their discretion).
Here’s the relevant part of their website for reference:
If you request an extreme number of keys and you are not offering Steam customers a comparable deal, or if your sole business is selling Steam Keys and not offering value to Steam customers, your request may be denied and you may lose the privilege to request keys.
I find it hard to believe Sony would run afoul of these guidelines. I’m not sure what they mean by “if your sole business is selling steam keys”. Maybe referring to shovelware ‘developers’ that use steam for laundering money, if I had to guess.
But Sony would run afoul of these guidelines.
Parity in this case would likely mean nearly everyone just buys directly from steam. No doubt Sony would infect the gaming process by injecting their launcher no matter what you do, but steam will get their 30%.
I don’t know what Sony could offer on their own storefront that plays well with parity rules to make people choose it over steam.
But the thought of them operating their own store front and offering steam keys with every sale won’t happen. Valve have stopped that in the past.
Is the CEO underestimating patience or is the author overestimating?
It’s not as if PlayStation is struggling right now. The PS5 seems to be selling pretty well.
Not to mention that consoles and PC’s are indirect competitors. A lot of people want to use a controller form their couch without jumping through hoops. Gen Z is trending away from desktops and laptops entirely in favor of mobile devices.
Obviously Sony is unhappy with the performance of the PS5 considering how much they’ve been trying to push PC ports lately. Not to mention Square Enix citing disappointing sales for their last couple of critically acclaimed Final Fantasy games as the reason they’re going to focus on multi-platform support going forward.
It’s not that the PS5 is doing bad (it isn’t), it’s that they want more money, simple as that. They saw what Microsoft was doing and they decided they wanted a piece of the pie too.
Nothing is “obvious” about that. What you present as the only possible conclusion from their actions is just your subjective interpretation. Could be true, of course. I highly doubt it (which is my subjective interpretation).
Someone realized that the investment required for making a PC port (or having the studio include it) is less than the money you can make from selling it on PC. Selling consoles (the hardware) isn’t what makes them money, it’s reasonably common for them to be sold at a loss, especially early in the life cycle. Profit comes from them buying games you take a cut from, which is unchanged if Sony is also the publisher (or even the developer).
In any case, if I’m right or wrong isn’t even the point either (I’m probably wrong, too). The point is it’s incredibly complicated, and nothing is even slightly “obvious” about it.
https://www.techspot.com/news/103189-ps5-becomes-sony-biggest-money-maker-crushing-past.html
Seems like almost every business area of PlayStation is doing well. Hardware, subscriptions, DLC, other micro transactions… The PS5 just became officially their most profitable generation.
They’re looking to maximize revenue and profit by expanding into the PC market. It’s great to see because it gives consumers more choice. That absolutely should not be interpreted as any sort of sign of weakness for the PS5. The PS5 seems to be doing better than the PS4 did, and the PS4 did well. They have crushed Xbox to the point where people are speculating Microsoft might want out of hardware. The Switch is harder to compare against because it’s near (really should be past) the end of its life, but the PS5 has been selling at a faster rate.
PC gaming is just starting to get back in track after a few down years for hardware sales (largely related to supply shortages and price gouging, especially GPU’s). But it’s starting to turn around, and it seems like Sony wants a piece of that. The question should not be “why is Sony pushing PC ports”, but “Why is Nintendo not porting to PC”.
Square-Enix has been mismanaged for decades and I don’t think is worth paying attention to.
We (PC gamers) have a wide swath of hardware and input preferences that consoles do not even make an ATTEMPT to accommodate. Then there’s the predatory “pay us a subscription to play online” thing, too.
Most PC gamers will just completely skip consoles rather than play games like that. Our patience is eternal and without end.
Seriously. I was thrilled to see Sony start porting over interesting looking games, but if they go back to their previous release standard, I’m fine going back to my previous “not playing ps exclusives” standards. I’ve got plenty of other games to get to. No need to go out of my way to get over the hurdles they put up.
Don’t forget things like locking everyone into their ecosystem. Case in point, Minecraft. On the pc using Bedrock I can connect to any server. Xbox and Nintendo versions I know for a fact you can only connect to approved servers. Not sure about the PS version, but I would venture it’s similar. So why would I want to limit myself by playing their locked down copy of the exact same game?
I think that’s accurate for a subset of PC gamers but there’s no shortage of people pre-ordering trash games or encouraging other shitty behavior like microtransactions on PC. Many of those problems could be solved with a patience that doesn’t currently exist in sufficient quantities to discourage publishers from bad practices.
This is just my theory, but with the price of game development increasing so rapidly, I think it’s getting harder for the impatient to cover the development costs and make a profit off shitty games, unless the game has a huge following. Games like COD, Diablo, Star Wars, etc.
For games without that following, I think they are definitely being punished for their bad practices. Like Gotham Knights, Red Fall, Saints Row, etc. Games that cost so much that they have potential to shut down studios
yup especially the pc gamer, especially with the presence of lots of banger indies, is spoiled for choice, that exclusivity is less of something enticing. And selling on FOMO don’t work as well when there’s also tons of f2p games competing on such feelings.
Playstation CEO doesn’t play games or else they would know how much more flexible PC gaming is for the user. They are hoping people will slum it with console locked ecosystems and non-moddable games using hardware that never improves.
True, consoles are rapidly approaching being indistinguishable from Kiosk moded, locked down miniature PC’s.
Approaching? I would say kiosk mode PC consoles started with Xbox and then PS4 joined the group, Nintendo is what’s left.
I think you are right.
Wouldn’t that be overestimating?
I’m sure as shit not buying a PS5 for any exclusive, PC or GTFO
I think it’s meant in this way:
…underestimates the Steam crowd’s patience to wait even longer for the games they want to play to become available without having to buy PS5 or sign up for another acount
No, they underestimated because they thought they’d want to do whatever is necessary to pay the sequel now, but pc gamers will wait forever if they have to rather than buy a console.
Oh boy I can see the new management is gonna work out great.
The PC community has slowly shifted towards buying/preordering ‘full price’ games and succumbing to micro(macro)transactions in the same way console markets do. But I don’t think buying a whole other device is on the menu for most.
What do you mean by “shifted to”. Was there ever a time when these were more common on consoles?
The game widely attributed to starting “micro transactions” was MapleStory, a windows MMORPG. PC games adapted online features like digital-only delivery, DLC’s, and micro transactions before consoles even had the capability to do so figures out. Even before online capabilities, I remember going to game stores in the 90’s and seeing “expansions” for PC games, which is what we used to call DLC back when it was physical.
When think “microtransaction”, I think of a handful of different games immediately. MMO’s, which are much more common on PC (chat features, complex inputs requiring a keyboard, add-ons or other enhancing programs running in the background). Simulation games (the Sims, Truck Simulator, Farming Simulator, Cities Skylines, Civ, etc) that usually are much easier with a M&KB than controller. Multiplayer battle games like MOBA’s or shooters (Valve has DOTA 2, TF2, CSGO and most others are either PC exclusive or multiplat). When I think of Sony in particular, I think of their cinematic single-player experiences. Which may have some DLC, but I don’t associate with predatory micro transactions like cosmetics or P2W schemes.
Consoles have tons of that too nowadays, but it seems like kind of weird to act like PC users are somehow less interested or susceptible to predatory pricing schemes.
Both pale compared to the mobile market though.
You are correct there, but I felt the PC community was a lot more patient and less willing to pay large amounts for games. They did however spend in their own games, MMO subscriptions, DLCs etc. It’s more the initial cost of games that we were more likely to object, but MTX has always been a problem since it’s introduction. League is selling a $500 dollar skin, the fact people don’t quit over things like that existing just shows how much we have succumbed.
I feel console generally buys whatever latest thing is marketed to them and they play that. PC generally tries the new thing then slowly they return to their comfort games they have been playing for 10 years.
I think there are populations of both patient and impatient gamers on both.
The absolute worst platform is Nintendo. You might as well buy the game on launch because it’s still going to be the same price 10 years later. Or even more expensive in some cases.
Consoles have been moving to digital, but they still have physical games. I can’t go to a local store or eBay and buy used Steam games. At the same time, Steam has great sales that do a lot to offset that.
In general I think media hypes up new releases, and there’s blame to go around omamong publishers, media outlets, and media consumers for that. But most online discussions on games are going to default to new releases unless it’s a specific “patient” or “retro” community. So it’s easy to underestimate how many people are fine waiting a couple of years. Or how many kids are waiting until their birthday or Christmas to play a game.
Absolutely and yeah Nintendo are the worst for games, ridiculous how they release old games at the same price as the new ones.
That would be like buying a car for ten times the price, limiting it to 10 kph and forcing yourself to sit on a 30*8 cm dildo while driving it: Way too expensive, limiting in every way and extremely uncomfortable.
To be fair, I do have to keep my wife from getting a PS5 for the FF7 remake games. SE will eventually release them on PC, and modders will fix whatever shit port job they do this time.
However, this does not come from a place of logic; she wants to see Cloud and Sephiroth fuuuuuuck.
and FF16! I have owned and 100%'d most FF’s and still I refuse to buy a PS5 for the exclusives.
However, this does not come from a place of logic; she wants to see Cloud and Sephiroth fuuuuuuck.
My wife bought Mass Effect because she wanted to fuck everybody.
She’s been hearing about BG3 and thinking about it.
…Can I get her number?
Only if you’re a video game with of horny choices
Oh, we know. She still insisted on the PS4 version when that came out. We comprised as I bought her a used copy to avoid giving SE any ideas that it’s ok to do that shit lol
This is why I have a PS5.
Granted, I don’t hate the thing, but I also don’t find it that useful.
I wish it supported ultrawide. Returnal does.
Even some of us with PS5s and PCs both might wait two years since it’s pretty easy to get (non Denuvo) PC games free…
We get the strangest reports sometimes.
Reporter: [REDACTED]
Reason: Piracy
PS fanbois be mad
I have enough games in my steam library that I could never buy another game, and be perfectly content. I’m quite willing to wait as long as it takes for a game to not only be brought to steam, but to get a major sale or be featured in a game bundle. Only difference is that if it takes too long, I’ll never get it at all because I’ll have better options.
I have enough games in my steam library that I could never buy another game, and be perfectly content
So, just Rimworld then.
Honestly though, same. I was really interested in Ghosts of Tsushima when it launched. Now years later it’s finally on PC but it costs more than I usually pay for new games. Fuck that. The only way I’m buying a PS5 is if a friend wants one and is willing to let me get it, play FF7 & 16 then sell it to them in a few months.
I mean if that worked, it would have worked so repeatedly in the past. Comments like these ought to immediately result in termination with no recompense, as they’re just factual bullshit that can be proven wrong with 10 seconds of googling.
I hate consoles
Fixed title:
PlayStation’s CEO drastically overestimates the PC crowd’s wallet capacity, thinks PC gamers will buy an inferior, overpriced, locked down PC that can only play specific games on a non-replacable proprietary OS with planned obsolescence for when the PS6 comes out
I’ll never not be a PC gamer but calling PS overpriced at the moment is wild. Compared to the cost of PC components right now 5 or 6 hundred is not ridiculous. That’s cheaper than mid to high tier GPU alone.
Perhaps in isolation, but given that most people need a PC, would you rather:
a) buy a subpar PC for productivity and a console that’s going to be wasted money in a few years’ time, and you need to invest even more money on a new console (unless you never want to play new games again), and/or pour a bunch of money into scam subscription online services to get games (or even play them at all if they’re online)
b) buy a good PC with money you would have otherwise spent on the console, that will last effectively until the hardware dies, and even then you can upgrade it instead of buying a new PC
I agree the LLM and cryptobro insanity has screwed the GPU market, but in the long run even at the current prices PCs are still a better deal.
As I said I play games on PC so I would rather option B. I’m just saying that I don’t think PS is comparatively that expensive. If PCs are a better deal, it’s not by that much.
and that’s accounting for a theoretical PS6, used PS5 rn is probably <$400.
Edit: typo
it is not as if used PCs with year old components aren’t cheaper than new ones. The console is significantly worse here because the subscription prices do not get reduced by anything because the hardware is older.
You are forgetting that you have to pay to play online. Your $500 console is an $800 console if you use it for 5 years. You can build a roughly PS5 equivalent PC (RX 6700) for more like $650-700 which is less overall.
Plus it’s a computer so you can also use it for normal computer things, and the games themselves are generally much cheaper with a huge backlog and sales all the time.
I did forget that. Also that price point is awesome, I just dumped a ton on a fresh build. I didn’t want to minmax on it but it’s cool you can get it that low and still have that level of quality. Gotta hate NVIDIA.
Also don’t forget living at the whim of the manufacturer with regards to backwards compatibility.
My PC game library goes back literally 30+ years. (I think the oldest game I play occasionally is Eye of the Beholder, 1991. The original doom is still good and from 1993)
That has value.
Tru
The Eye of the Beholder series really bring back childhood memories, even if i didn’t finish any of them - furthest i got was in EotB 2, and i after being stuck for a while in an area with those cultists i gave up. i didn’t even understand english back then lol
This is an excellent point. The availability of games.
On PC, you can play pretty much every game ever, with varying degrees of legality, whether directly, or indirectly using an emulator, with the only exception to this being very modern titles on consoles which do not have an emulator for PC yet, or that are still locked in a bullshit exclusivity deal.
Meanwhile, PS/XBox is limited to whatever Sony/Microsoft deems appropriate to have on their console.
On console you live and die by someone else’s rules, on PC, the sky is the limit.
