PlayStation Studios Development

[kitler53]

Cannot wait for Wolverine and Kena 2 too.

oh right, wolverine should be great and ships this year too.   i'm very excited about kena 2 but i don't view it as a ps studios game.

[the-pi-guy]

I don't think it's been talked about a lot here. But Bungie is undergoing very extensive layoffs.  

Destiny 2 support ended, and Bungie has largely been cut in half. 

[Legend]

I don't think it's been talked about a lot here. But Bungie is undergoing very extensive layoffs. 

Destiny 2 support ended, and Bungie has largely been cut in half.

Hermen Hulst was so good at Guerilla, but man has playstation been bad under him.

Buy Bungie, have Bungie shut down tlou factions, have bungie itself half shut down.

[kitler53]

I don't think it's been talked about a lot here. But Bungie is undergoing very extensive layoffs. 

Destiny 2 support ended, and Bungie has largely been cut in half.

because in the current world this is a pretty non-story.   goes to show you how bad things have gotten industry/world wide.

[nnodley]

It doesn't help marathon was pretty much a flop. Bungie needs to go back to singleplayer games. 

[nnodley]

live service is a death trap anymore. The promise of endless printing of cash is a fool's errand for 95% of live service games.

[kitler53]

i honestly think the best way to make a live service game is to quickly pivot after the launch of a successful single player game.   i'd like to believe that is what sony did with GT.  

the problem with a multi-player only game is i will never have confidence in buying a game that cannot be played if other people aren't also playing the game.   it can be an upward spiral but more often it's a downward spiral.  build something i can have confidence in buying and playing even if the game otherwise flops then try to monetize if/when it goes viral.

even the now infamous fortnight launched with only a single pve mode.  the battle royal mode came quickly after but it wasn't there day-1.   

[Legend]

live service is a death trap anymore. The promise of endless printing of cash is a fool's errand for 95% of live service games.

Capcom I think said something about this.

Basically that a single player game might lose money too, but it's still going to make some of its money back. While a live service game might pull a concord and set the entire investment on fire. It's just not worth it.

[kitler53]

Capcom I think said something about this.

Basically that a single player game might lose money too, but it's still going to make some of its money back. While a live service game might pull a concord and set the entire investment on fire. It's just not worth it.

again, why i think pivoting a "single player" game into a GaaS makes so much sense.   

like, clear not every single player game can piviot to a GaaS game that easily.   so like,.. maybe you're making a game that you intend to GaaSify from the start but I think you need to lead with the game has a single player experience in addition to the multiplayer stuff.   

marathon looks amazing to me except that i loath pvp.   if this game had a campain and pve from the start i'll bet it would have done 10x better.  maybe not all buyers stick around for the pvp but at least the pvp buyers can feel confident that buying the game won't be a complete waste of money and take a chance on the game.   without that you get the concords that literally make $0 of revenue after sony refunded everyones purchase.

[Legend]

again, why i think pivoting a "single player" game into a GaaS makes so much sense. 

like, clear not every single player game can piviot to a GaaS game that easily.  so like,.. maybe you're making a game that you intend to GaaSify from the start but I think you need to lead with the game has a single player experience in addition to the multiplayer stuff. 

marathon looks amazing to me except that i loath pvp.  if this game had a campain and pve from the start i'll bet it would have done 10x better.  maybe not all buyers stick around for the pvp but at least the pvp buyers can feel confident that buying the game won't be a complete waste of money and take a chance on the game.  without that you get the concords that literally make $0 of revenue after sony refunded everyones purchase.

Single player campaign and I would have loved Marathon (if it was good).

I played Destiny 1 and 2 just for their campaigns.

[BananaKing]

Kitler while I agree to some extent with what you're saying. The issue is that you're likely doubling the production budget and increasing the production time by a lot. 

Because you can't tack on a 3-5 hour single player or else it will feel like an after thought. For example for honor, the single player was never a reason people bought it. (Even though it was good!)

[kitler53]

Single player campaign and I would have loved Marathon (if it was good).

I played Destiny 1 and 2 just for their campaigns.

i did destiny mostly for the co-op strikes.  but of course i did the campaign as well.

the absolute worst part of destiny was the forced engagement into pvp.  it didn't happen a lot but there were a few points where if you wanted to get a gun or whatever there was a "play X games of ..." requirement or worse yet ".. get Y kills while in X".  as a guy that hate pvp and is terrible at it the forced engagement into pvp was the worst. 

i'd be interested in a version of marthon that was good and strictly coop pve. 

[kitler53]

Kitler while I agree to some extent with what you're saying. The issue is that you're likely doubling the production budget and increasing the production time by a lot.

Because you can't tack on a 3-5 hour single player or else it will feel like an after thought. For example for honor, the single player was never a reason people bought it. (Even though it was good!)

i doubt it is double.    i don't work games but i work software.   if things were well planed from the start it should be at worst 1.5x the work to add things like a single player campaign or co-op mode to a "complete" pvp game.  you'd be a fool to have the single player stuff be a from the ground up completely different game than the pvp mode.   it should share most of the same fundamentals.   

like,.. GoW Ragnarök released a (free) rogue-lite mode after the main campain.  do you think that was double the production cost?    i highly doubt it.



we used to get sequels that played almost exactly like the previous game.   something that went wrong in AAA development is thinking every single game needs to have genre defining innovation.   they need to do better reusing their existing work.

[the-pi-guy]

we used to get sequels that played almost exactly like the previous game.   something that went wrong in AAA development is thinking every single game needs to have genre defining innovation.   they need to do better reusing their existing work.

This drove me nuts with God of War Ragnarok. Some were complaining that it wasn't another reinvention.

If I love a game, I basically usually want more of it with variation (different story or something.)

There is so much push to change everything with games, it's ridiculous.

[nnodley]

This drove me nuts with God of War Ragnarok. Some were complaining that it wasn't another reinvention.

If I love a game, I basically usually want more of it with variation (different story or something.)

There is so much push to change everything with games, it's ridiculous.

Yes 1000000000%!!!  Studios have given into whiny gamers who think if a game isn't defining the generation, it's terrible. They also tend to be the loudest vocal minority online, so it shuts out the people who genuinely just want fun sequels that just build on the story and maybe enhance the gameplay just a tad to have some variety.