PlayStation Live Service Model Questioned

[T0@st]

Sony has invested a boatload of cash into boosting research and development efforts at its growing games division—this financial year's 300 billion yen injection (roughly $2.13 billion) will help its business keep up with Microsoft's inevitable and forthcoming absorption of the mega-sized Activision Blizzard publishing group. Sony's Interactive Entertainment (SIE) division has already expanded around plans that anticipate the live service gaming market hitting a value of $19 billion by 2026—PlayStation/SIE CEO Jim Ryan has reportedly been leading these efforts. Many folks in the industry see him as the key figure behind Sony's highly ambitious strategy, but his recently announced retirement has cast doubt on this controversial direction.

The rumor mill has placed around ten ongoing first party titles being developed for live service launch in the future, including an always online Horizon spin-off—Bungie is believed to be the central hub of MMO expertise, with advice handed out to less multiplayer-adept first party studios. Bloomberg's Jason Schreier reckons that this has become a point of contention under the outgoing chief's tenure: "Over the last two years, Ryan has overseen a PlayStation shift toward "games as a service," a popular industry buzzword referring to video games, usually multiplayer, that can be monetized over long periods of time. It's been an uncomfortable pivot for some of Sony's studios, which have spent the last decade building out teams of experienced developers to make big, cinematic adventure games that are played solo."




According to his inside sources at SIE and associated satellite studios, Schreier thinks that the next CEO will be navigating choppy oceans: "Bungie's expertise has not yet been able to turn PlayStation Studios into a service-game factory. A few years ago, service games were the hottest thing in the industry. But now, even the sensation Fortnite isn't making as much money as it once did. This bet on multiplayer games may not pay off the way Ryan and his team had once hoped. Now, with Ryan on his way out, there are a lot of questions to ask about the strategic future of PlayStation. Some insiders are worried about the company's lack of coherent vision, with its seemingly misplaced bets on service games, niche VR headsets and a baffling machine called the PlayStation Portal."

Jim Ryan's comment (regarding his retirement):
"After 30 years, I have made the decision to retire from SIE in March 2024. I've relished the opportunity to have a job I love in a very special company, working with great people and incredible partners. But I've found it increasingly difficult to reconcile living in Europe and working in North America. I will leave having been privileged to work on products that have touched millions of lives across the world; PlayStation will always be part of my life, and I feel more optimistic than ever about the future of SIE. I want to thank Yoshida-san for placing so much trust in me and being an incredibly sensitive and supportive leader."

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Vayra86]

Die gaming cloud and service based gaming, die. Horribly, bloody and hopefully with so many casualties we won't ever think of it again.

Sony's strength was always the fact you could just disconnect and still have great gaming ahead of you. That's essentially the gist of it; Sony, do what you do well. Get creative and cool games out there. Everything else, don't mingle. Just like MS you should provide content to the core of gaming, not to all the fluff around it. The bottom line of gaming never changes: it needs to be an enjoyable experience, and one of escapism. Funneling consumers through a constant money hole isn't immersive, isn't enjoyable, and kills escapism. Stahp.

There's really only one great time for the online subscription game, and that was the WoW days. When the competition was maybe a handful of other titles, but none as expansive, yet still strong in their own niche, this works. But much like streaming services... they can only exist and be profitable if they go big, read: eat the whole market. Its a self defeating model. Even if you have endless money, you still have a limited commodity called time. 30-31 days in a month, and then you're paying all those things again. People are going to see the waste and cut down, and kill most of them in the process.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

"live service" games are a hot mess. Players do not want to grind out a second job just for a game, they are tired of waiting years for a game to be finished, and it costs developers HUGE amounts of time and money. The last 5 years have seen a graveyard full of this trash, and sony thinks its a good idea to get into them? Sounds about as well thought out as squeenix getting into NFTs last year.

 

[DavidC1]

Okay, but you guys are fully aware they'll continue trying right? Arguably it was WoW(the same game you cited in the "good") days that ruined Blizzard, because of the massive success.

Gaming is mostly dead with the ESR and woke push anyway.

 

[FreedomEclipse]

Why couldnt Sony just go harder into NFTs instead? That way the only people that get affected by it are those with more money than sense. Not their entire PSN community/customer base.

 

[HisDivineOrder]

I wish game developers and especially publishers would realize that gamers just want to buy games, pay the once, and get the game, again especially at full price. No game that sells at full price should have a Battle Pass. The Live Service model is going to suffer the same fate it always suffers in every incarnation: people hate it and the vast majority of games using it are going to die. This first started with MMO's where everyone chased one leader for a decade. It happened again with loot boxes. It's been happening with games with battle passes.

The model is just malarky. Go back to what has always worked historically assuming the game is good. No, no game is going to be the evergreen that forever and ever makes you rich. Even Timbo is realizing that Fortnite is losing steam. Stop trying to get out of making games and just make games.

 

[Space Lynx]

Die gaming cloud and service based gaming, die. Horribly, bloody and hopefully with so many casualties we won't ever think of it again.

Sony's strength was always the fact you could just disconnect and still have great gaming ahead of you. That's essentially the gist of it; Sony, do what you do well. Get creative and cool games out there. Everything else, don't mingle. Just like MS you should provide content to the core of gaming, not to all the fluff around it. The bottom line of gaming never changes: it needs to be an enjoyable experience, and one of escapism. Funneling consumers through a constant money hole isn't immersive, isn't enjoyable, and kills escapism. Stahp.

There's really only one great time for the online subscription game, and that was the WoW days. When the competition was maybe a handful of other titles, but none as expansive, yet still strong in their own niche, this works. But much like streaming services... they can only exist and be profitable if they go big, read: eat the whole market. Its a self defeating model. Even if you have endless money, you still have a limited commodity called time. 30-31 days in a month, and then you're paying all those things again. People are going to see the waste and cut down, and kill most of them in the process.

it will die soon, the destiny player base is dwindling in droves, sony made a mistake buying Bungie. a big one. they thought if they could get the original Halo makers that would really stick it to xbox... dumb as fuck and reading the market completely wrong.

Sony strayed from its roots and is getting burned because of it. its relying so heavily on spider man now too... instead of creating new original IP, its pathetic and sad to see.

between my childhood memories of playing Warcraft 3 on launch day and loving it, and lot of Sony IP too, and watching what the companies have become.... it has made me realize no company is worth investing in, cause eventually they all turn to garbage.

I still remember when Blizz was bought out and they reassured the fan base everything would be ok.... lol... still can't download my offline warcraft 3 client that I paid for to this day... fucking twats.

 

[Vayra86]

Okay, but you guys are fully aware they'll continue trying right? Arguably it was WoW(the same game you cited in the "good") days that ruined Blizzard, because of the massive success.

Gaming is mostly dead with the ESR and woke push anyway.

Companies that lose sight of what they exist for in a market, will die. Luckily. In the case of Actiblizz, good riddance at this point. They got lazy, they bled talent, they lost.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

it will die soon, the destiny player base is dwindling in droves, sony made a mistake buying Bungie. a big one. they thought if they could get the original Halo makers that would really stick it to xbox... dumb as fuck and reading the market completely wrong.

Sony strayed from its roots and is getting burned because of it. its relying so heavily on spider man now too... instead of creating new original IP, its pathetic and sad to see.

between my childhood memories of playing Warcraft 3 on launch day and loving it, and lot of Sony IP too, and watching what the companies have become.... it has made me realize no company is worth investing in, cause eventually they all turn to garbage.

I still remember when Blizz was bought out and they reassured the fan base everything would be ok.... lol... still can't download my offline warcraft 3 client that I paid for to this day... fucking twats.

The ultimate irony was that they closed multiple studios that had a track record of making great games. WipEout being the most notable. When was the last time we got a motorstorm game? A killzone that didnt suck? Maybe you shouldnt have let naughty dog sell off jak and daxter? The list goes on. The PS4 era was a huge disappointment and the PS5 isnt doing much better.

Now they have NuBungie and their socially aware shooter game that has monetized itself into the grave. Congratulations. Hope it was worth it Sony.

I wish game developers and especially publishers would realize that gamers just want to buy games, pay the once, and get the game, again especially at full price. No game that sells at full price should have a Battle Pass. The Live Service model is going to suffer the same fate it always suffers in every incarnation: people hate it and the vast majority of games using it are going to die. This first started with MMO's where everyone chased one leader for a decade. It happened again with loot boxes. It's been happening with games with battle passes.

The model is just malarky. Go back to what has always worked historically assuming the game is good. No, no game is going to be the evergreen that forever and ever makes you rich. Even Timbo is realizing that Fortnite is losing steam. Stop trying to get out of making games and just make games.

Short term greed combined with millions of gamers that will happily buy into a live service for the first year keep this machine rolling. The problem isnt the devs, if these types of games flopped on launch then nobody would make them. The reason they stick around is they work, often for several years, and pump out hundreds of millions in pure profit.

Blame gamers, who keep buying this trash and wonder why they get served trash.

 

[DavidC1]

Companies that lose sight of what they exist for in a market, will die. Luckily. In the case of Actiblizz, good riddance at this point. They got lazy, they bled talent, they lost.

The problem is more fundamental - people and the politicians. More trivial aspect of life such as games will be the first to go, because when harder times come people's priority will shift. I am not saying games are worthless or anything. It's just very low in the "do we humans need this?" rung of the ladder.

 

[Vayra86]

The problem is more fundamental - people and the politicians. More trivial aspect of life such as games will be the first to go, because when harder times come people's priority will shift. I am not saying games are worthless or anything. It's just very low in the "do we humans need this?" rung of the ladder.

Oh yeah its highly elastic economically. But I do think that's a perspective that changes over time. Gaming twenty years ago did take a different spot in many people's lives than it does today. Its relevance has grown, especially because everyone carries a device that is absolutely not as 'elastic' in their pockets. At the same time, gaming things you own are available even after you've bought it. That's also why live services are the very first to fall in economic downturn.

Still it'll probably always lose against, food, a roof over your head etc.