Readers Feature

[Maryokutai]

Except for the part where I can shove Panzer Dragoon Orta into my Series X and play it. But it's probably fair to assume that whatever Frankenstein monster MS will release next as their flagship 'console' is not going to have a disc drive either, so yeah, you're probably better off just switching to PC completely. But on the other hand console players (myself included) often dread that switch, so in the end it'll probably just drive a bunch of hardcore Xbox fans into the Playstation ecosystem, leaving MS baffled as to where their Gamepass subscribers went.

 

I'm genuinely clueless as to what the plan for their future is. A PC-like console without any exclusives is kind of the most unappealing piece of tech I can imagine as a platform. I'm intrigued to see what path they'll be taking but I doubt I'll be along for the ride.

[mfnick]

I’ve been thinking about this more recently since MS has totally shit the bed so I don’t feel the need to own a Xbox going forward. & this is probably where things will eventually end up going anyway so maybe a good idea to make that switch sooner rather than later so I’ve got my library there goin forward. 
 

But it’s still mega expensive to get into & that switch does still terrify me. + Maf does a great job of reminding me of all the extra issues you do still get with PC gaming which I absolutely can not be arsed with. 
 

Maybe one day, but not yet. 

[Maf]

But hopefully I also talk about all the good things about PC. Being able to mod Sonic games. Really great performance. Amazing backwards compatibility. Pirating games. It is almost, always a pain in the ass if you want to do anything other than click the green play button on Steam (and even then…) but there are times when I use my PC that makes me go damn. That’s really cool 

 

NEVER WHEN USING A KEYBOARD THOUGH IT’S THE DUMBEST SHIT IN THE WORLD 
 

Who knows what Xbox are thinking anymore but I think they either build hardware and reverse their 3rd party exclusives strategy (which I think they should reverse on PC as well but they have too many Gamepass customers on it so that won’t happen)

 

Or they abandon the hardware and just go full 3rd party. 
 

i can’t imagine how being a platform holder and putting your exclusives on other platforms makes sense. 
 

Anyway, fuck ‘em, I’m primarily a Switch 2 person going forward because Nintendo do everything I like and they do it as simple as possible 

[mfnick]

You also still buy games on console when you have a PC that far outperforms it. Which says everything really. 

[Maf]

DFS > DLSS 

[one-armed dwarf]

Tbf, the reader writing this letter says that he has his PC set up for couch gaming. That isn't really a platform specific limitation

 

BC is the best part about PC I think. I would probably be much more positive on PS5 if it could play every PS1, 2 and 3 game on top of 4. I prefer more games from those gens to the current PS gens anyway. So as a result the PS5 library is super disappointing to me and I never play it anymore

[Maf]

He also talks about what a pain in the ass it is which I why is did it once and went “cool, Batman!” then unplugged it 

[DANGERMAN]

I'll jump in and say Steam OS is a great way to play PC games without a keyboard, no idea how feasible that is on a desktop PC currently, but a theoretical Steam Console that's more powerful than a Steam Deck would be pretty cool 

 

I used to have my phone connected to my pc so I could boot it when I came in to the house (so long as I was on the same network), then control it using the touch screen as a mouse, shut it down and control the volume. I mean, it wasn't how I'd choose to play a game, although I might have played some Football Manager

 

I think, someone like me who has their own place and no kids, I can make a PC work as a living room pc. However, I've also seen people struggle with using a PS5 as a Sky Go player, they can't do it, can't use a game controller to select the show they want to watch, it's nuts. I don't think we'll ever get to the point where a traditional PC is a living room pc for your average person, we'll get to the point where consoles are just limited pcs (we're there now), and we'll get to the point where your TV has a browser and some sort of store so you can stream IPTV stuff (we're there now), but we'll never get a fully open like the PC, with all the more useful inputs like a keyboard and mouse

[Maf]

I never use my apps on console anymore. Whenever I watch a streaming service it’s either on the TV apps or iPad 

 

Console is literally just for playing games. PC is for playing games, working or general internet use 

[Sly Reflex]

Forever ago on this very forum I said that if we were ever to have a single platform it would have to be PC. I cannot find it, but I know I did it because the very idea got shot down. But we're slowly stepping closer to that. MS are on a mission to do whatever the fuck they are doing right now and Sony are plodding along and trying to make good on a bad situation, as I understand it. It's just the way it's going.

 

For what it's worth I don't think the console way will ever truly go away. The steamdeck is a console, it's all nicely prepackaged, you install your games and they work, for the most.

 

What I do think will happen is you will see lots of these bits of kit that are standardised to some degree like the steamdeck and the ASUS ROG stuff. Maybe even third party chip companies will pitch in, you have companies like GIGABYTE working on a lot of kit and it totally wouldn't surprise me if they were to make something more uniformed for that market.

 

I think much was made of steam boxes back in the day as well. I don't really know the chances of seeing something like that, but never say never. We've seen weirder shit happen.

 

My main gripe with this whole readers thing is they have no idea what the next lot of consoles are going to be doing. We can speculate and make good predictions, but outside of the really obvious things we really don't have a clue.

 

I think also, the scope of what games are is absolutely broken and that factors in to how they are made and how they are received, as well as the costs and design philosophies that go into them.

 

Look at GTA6. They have speculated that this game has already cost 2 billion dollars to make. There's no doubt that it'll make that back purely based of it being GTA6. But when you are MS or Sony and you're looking to make the next wave of games that will stand shoulder to shoulder with GTA6, how do you budget for that? And if it flops because the title doesn't have the prestige or recognition that GTA has, then what? It's not a sustainable model.

 

MS has some of the most cherished and profitable games under its umbrella now and even they I think wouldn't even consider spending that much on a game. Not even Elder Scrolls. I just don't think that trajectory is possible without 1. Charging a fuckload to purchase the game and 2. make the game playable without it being mired with lots of MTX and other additions that would require payments.

 

You might be asking "Why are you bringing this up, this wasn't the question" but it leads into it.

PlayStation 5 is currently the leader of this gen units sold wise. 60 million units shifted. Lets be kind and match that for Xbox. So overall you have 120 million. You can throw on the Switch's 150m units sold on top of that for 270 million potential players. This pales in comparison to the 2 billion people that supposedly have access to a PC that can play games. Steam itself has just under 1 billion people logging in.

 

Now not all those will be able to run GTA6 or whatever comes out in the future, but they can run something. Why, as a developer of games that wants to make something that can reach as wider audience as they can ignore this? Especially in a field where games that get put out there can be sold in waves as people upgrade and become able to enjoy more and more resource intensive games?

 

I think myself, I've barely played anything that was brand spanking new for some time. I know I'm the outlier there. But I am thinking that developments in the world of games have sort of forced stuff to PC.

 

Let me explain why.

 

When you get a console it has a fixed lifespan. You hand over your money, you get your 4 to 7 years out of it, the next one comes out and you do it all over again. Depending on where you jump in on the lifecycle dictates how much time you get to spend playing "new" stuff.

 

When you get a PC you also get a life span, but it's not the same as a console one. You have a components lifespan, in which you can use it until a part goes bad, at which point you replace said part, and you have the never ending march of the halflife decay of your system no longer being able to play the latest games on reasonable settings.

 

Both systems have the same degradation in how games play as time passes. That's just a fact. The frame rate and textures suffer, loading times increase, the fans blow harder and all that business.

 

The difference is that once a console gets long in the tooth, that's it. Done. Nothing more will be released for it outside of shovelware. I just had a quick look at PS4's release stuff for 2025 and it's like 30+ games with nothing of note.

 

On PC you don't have that issue. I could, if I wanted, pull the PC's that I have in storage apart, build a rig and play games on it. Would it be able to play the latest shit? Maybe, at a lower settings. Maybe not. But the point is I would have a PC that I could set up and play games on.

 

The point I am getting to here is games filter down as people upgrade. Because the jump is granular and not binary like purchasing a console would be, those games sell and get played constantly. And on top of that, you are getting games being made and sold at all levels of entry. It never stops. Plus you get the thing of playing an older favourite on a newer set of hardware. The change might be incremental or massive depending on your upgrade. But the option is there.

 

We're at a crossroads currently with games as entertainment as to where we play. I honestly believe that a lot of people are going to pick the fork and join PC gaming because it's providing the only real long term solution to a hobby people will want to pursue, even with all the shitty parts of it.

[Metroid66]

Yeah, I got wise to this late last year. Plus pc gaming allows you reconstruct your  library of games that consoles have retired due to generational shifts for peanuts - or, if you have prime gaming, for nothing. 

 

 

[Nag]

 

Quote

A reader is unimpressed by the way in which Sony unveiled Ghost Of Yōtei’s release date and feels it hints at a grim future for PlayStation.

 

We all know that Sony has been acting strange for years now. We got about two normal years out of them, when the PlayStation 5 first launched, and then they basically went crazy. Suddenly all they were talking about were live service games, then they stopped talking about anything at all, and then they stopped releasing anything either.

 

There were basically no big PlayStation first party games last year. Yes, they had Astro Bot, which won lots of awards, but it didn’t sell all that well and by Sony’s own words was not a major release.

 

This year is just as bad. We’re at the end of April and the only things they’ve had out are an ultra expensive The Last Of Us compilation and Days Gone Remastered. The only thing they’ve got coming up is Death Stranding 2 (which they didn’t make, so isn’t really first party) and, so we learned this week, Ghost Of Yōtei in October.

 

We haven’t heard anything about Ghost Of Yōtei since last year and then this week we got a new trailer, a release date, and pre-order details. How was this unveiled? Via a new State of Play? Or maybe a showcase dedicated to the game? At least it must’ve been a part of some other preview show, right?

 

No, they had a tweet. And then later there was a short PlayStation Blog. That’s it.

 

I’m just sick of this. Why is Sony like this now? Why do they seem to hate being a games publisher? Why do they hate talking to their fans so much? Why do they love doing nothing instead?

 

Everything is a minimum effort. The announcements, the number of games coming out, the way everything is presented… it’s a bizarre mix of laziness, arrogance, and a total lack of energy. I don’t know what it is Sony execs would rather be doing, but it’s certainly not selling video games.

 

How Sony got like this is a mystery but it’s hardly the most important one. The real question is are they ever going to get out of this weird funk they’ve put themselves into and if not what happens next?

 

If Microsoft hadn’t imploded before them then PlayStation would’ve been in real trouble but instead they’ve been rewarded for their incompetence and laziness with the easiest ride in gaming.

 

Yes, Nintendo is going to beat them with the Switch 2, that much is obvious, but Nintendo doesn’t do what Sony does. Gaming cannot just be Nintendo and PCs. Or maybe it can?

 

Maybe Sony’s inaction is pushing us towards that one format future that at one time seemed so desirable. I don’t think it is, because Sony is living proof of what happens when you have no competition, but I think it’s going to happen anyway.

 

My prediction is that Nintendo will continue to be a success doing its own thing, but that PC will continue to gain ground until Sony just quietly give up on consoles and go third party like Xbox.

 

I imagine it’ll be a slow decline, that gradually begins to seem inevitable until, like Xbox, in the end nobody really cares all that much.

 

It’ll be a sad, pathetic end for PlayStation, but it’ll be no less than Sony deserves based on their recent inaction. I wish it wasn’t true, but I really can’t see any other way this is going to end.

 

By reader Ashton Marley

 

[mfnick]

They’re so far ahead, Xbox has gone multi platform basically killing all competition. It was bound to happen. They don’t have to try anymore. With how long games take now that live service push really fucked them too. That’s like 2-3 years of a 5+ year development cycle gone. Almost the entire gen wasted on trend chasing. 

[Sly Reflex]

A tweet is much cheaper than holding an event. When the coffers are low and you are trying to penny pinch, it's the obvious option.

[Maryokutai]

It also doesn't make sense to ramp up marketing for a game that's only due out in October when people have just put their jackets into the closet. So I don't quite see an issue with that per se.

 

Though obviously like mentioned they also have no reason to be more present because PS5 is just the default system for certain games now, just as Switch 2 will be for others later this year. We'll have two systems running in parallel without any kind of direct competition in the future, and as consumers that's not gong to be a fun landscape.

[Nag]

 

Quote

A reader is sceptical about the current leadership in the video games industry and worries that the needs of gamers are not the priority for publishers.

 

The games industry is in such a strange place at the moment. On the one hand we have amazing games being released, with things like Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, Blue Prince, and Monster Hunter Wilds. And on the other we have publishers acting like monsters, cutting hundreds of jobs at a time, while making billions in profits. Not only that but making business decisions so stupid that its left ordinary gamers like me absolutely baffled.

 

It’s not just the obsession with live service games (which Sony proved this week they still can’t shake) but the total refusal to deal with the rising cost of making games, with anything other than price rises. When even Nintendo sees that as the only answer you know they’re not even trying to address the problems, and that’s what got me to thinking.

 

It seems to me that nobody high up in the games industry is in the slightest bit interested in being a custododian, as you might say, of gaming. Nobody is looking out for its long term health, nobody cares whether people lose their jobs or developers go under, and definitely nobody cares about art.

 

You might call me naïve for even thinking any of these things were possible but whenever something bad happens in gaming I think back to that awful photo of Phil Spencer (the head of Xbox) and the head of Blizzard at the time, standing in front of hundreds of Blizzard employees, a huge number of which got laid off only a few days later.

 

Both men must’ve known that at the time but they’re both grinning away as if they’re at a pop concert, soaking up the adulation from their ‘fans’.

 

Nobody in charge of a game publisher is in the role for anything other than themselves. They don’t even care about the company, just their own money, bonuses, and eventual golden parachute. Remember when the head of Microsoft had Game Pass targets removed from the list of things he had to do to get a bonus? These people don’t care about anything but their own bank balance.

 

They’re only human, I suppose you could say. I’m not sure I would be any different if I was earning $10 million a year. But then recently I was watching a video by Alanah Pearce, who used to work at Sony Santa Monica, about everything that’s going on. It’s very interesting, and only 20 minutes long, so I advise everyone to watch.

 

A lot of it was familiar to me from things GC has said in the past, about publishers not being interested in what gamers want but instead what will please investors. They make money from selling games, obviously, but that takes time to filter through. Most of the actual cash flow, as I understand, comes from investors and venture capitalists.

 

What this video makes clear, is that we ordinary people are not even the customers of these companies, of Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, EA, Ubisoft and the rest. The investors are. Everything games publishers do they do for them. Once you realise that all the dumb decisions suddenly start to make sense.

 

There’s too many live service games and gamers want more single-player games, but it never happens. Why? Because investors know about Fortnite, Minecraft, and the rest and they want more of that. Even just the potential of a hit of that scale is far more important to them than just a modest profit from a normal game.

 

Already sick of hearing about AI in games? Tough. Investors love it. Even if it doesn’t work and it’s going to ruin the economy by putting so many people out of work, if they find out AI is involved they’re more likely to invest. And it’ll be the same for whatever dumb buzzword is next in tech, just like it was for NFTs.

 

Games are getting too expensive to make so maybe we should cut budgets and shorten games… that doesn’t make sense to investors. They don’t understand, or want to understand, gaming so the only logical thing to them is to put more money in to get more money out.

 

If any publisher tries to pretend to you that they’re doing it for the gamers or give a damn about what the game is or who’s making it… they’re lying. All they’re interested in is what pleases investors. Even laying people off is part of that, because that’s what investors expect any company to do, that isn’t showing infinite growth.

 

Everything bad that’s happening to the games industry right now is because of greedy execs looking out for themselves and uncaring investors looking for easy money. Any good games that come out of that is purely a side product and no one that could make things better has any interest in doing so. Publishers don’t care about games, and they definitely don’t care about you.

 

By reader Grackle

 

[one-armed dwarf]

maf posted that video in the shout thread before it got blipped but it talks about the way games are financed and the reasons why certain decisions are made, and presents an argument that a lot of the things people gripe about are somewhat implacable problems. It's well worth watching, or listening to anyway

 

 

On AI, this is the type of thing that devs are going to be forced to look into cause it is an attractive prospect for investment. Also frankly, there are potential upsides to the technology when used in games, potentially. Also lots of downsides, if used poorly, and we all end up playing hallucinated slop for the rest of the generation