As someone who has sunk a lot of money into my current collection this really annoys the hell out of me.
PlayStation Plus has improved the split of PS4 and PS5 players on its priciest tiers, but Sony continues to hide total subscriber numbers.
I for one will be going back to essential at the next renewal. When I feel a game is good & right up my alley, I’ll check trusted reviews & just buy it.
I would like to see Sony add a fourth tier of PS Plus for people who just want to be able to play games online without any of the perks like monthly games, store discounts, or anything like that, and it should cost $20 annually, $30 maximum. There’s no way I’m paying $80 just to play games online. Even the original $60 fee was too much, and I would often wait for sales to re-up my subscription.
Just let my subscription lapse for the first time since 2010. Will sub again every now and then for a month or so to access my old ps+ games but for me it's the end of an era.
Let those numbers continue to drop because it is now too expensive. $80 per year just to play online. I noticed they didn't offer any discounts on the subscription or controllers during this year's days of play for the first time in many years and they will feel it when people choose not to renew.
My subscription will lapse next month and it will stay that way until further notice.
During Sony’s recent business segment meeting and investor presentation regarding its game and network services, the PlayStation company revealed that PlayStation 5 is the company’s “most profitable generation to-date.”
It’s the top slide of the presentation, showing that in its first four years, the PS5 generation has already hit $106 billion in sales, having almost caught up to the PS4’s total $107 billion generated.
Operating income for the PS5 generation has also already surpassed that of the PS4, having now reached $10 billion.
I wouldn't doubt it. They released a high quality system. A lot of high quality games from themselves and their support of 3rd party developers and indies. They released many high quality remakes and remasters. They released a high quality GaaS game going against the naysayers thinking Sony would abandon single player games. And they most likely are profiting a lot more than PS1, PS2 PS4 and the loss leading PS3 that drained all their profits.
Now, I'll wait to see what's cooking tomorrow. But can you use some of those profits to better support your high quality VR headset? Because, by supporting it, you can sell more games and more systems and make more profits?
This will surely shut up all the new trolling accounts trying to spread lies and non facts in other articles comment sections before this article is posted.
Wow! I am super impressed that in just 4 years, ps5 already caught up to the PS4's. Congratulations.
"AI is not a substitute for human creativity. We position it as a technology that supports creativity. Creativity resides in people. We will continue to contribute to people's creativity through technology," the CEO said.
...not yet but 100% within the next 10 years!
..Then Sony will use it like the drop of a hat. They're no different to the others.
People that aren't software developers just don't understand the benefits of AI. People who's only exposure to A.I is the Terminator movie and other related sci fi films won't understand the benefits it provides.
It's not about replacing human labor. It's about making human labor easier.
Many years ago, I had laser eye surgery done. It was performed by a robot. The doctor took my measurements and calibrated the machine to make sure it would do what needed be done. And then the robot corrected my vision in 10 seconds.
15 years later and I still have 20/20 vision.
Seriously nothing gets to me like finding out your £500 of games cannot be played by your new console. What the hell?
this article is what i was lukin for because even if "always on" and "backward compatibility " feature is a rumor and not a fact still i will not going to buy it bcoz of this..
Can only speak for myself, but BC isn't remotely important to me. I don't buy a new console to play my old games and I keep my old systems anyway.
I'm a PC gamer predominately, so I have a huge back catalog of 'old' PC games and its incredibly rare for me to play anything over a year old and when I do, it's usually because of some MOD.
BC is really important to me.
I don't want loads of machines under the tv. My stand doesn't have room, my TV doesn't have enough HDMI ports, my wall doesn't have enough sockets, and It just plain looks bad.
Now, I sure all you bedroom/basement dwelling games have no problem since, well, your entire lives look cheap and tacky.
But I own a house. I take pride in my surroundings. I don't even like seeing wires exposed around my equipment. I certainly don't want a ton of all hardware cluttering up my entertainment setup.
Also, consoles these days just don't last all that long. here today, gone tomorrow. They are built to cheap. Sony and M$ do not intend for you to be playing them 5 years from now, they expect you to be playing on their next systems.
No one cared about backwards compatibility until the PS2 came around because before that it was unheard of. I see the ups and downs of not having the ability but at the same time just keep your ps3 and 360 it really isn't that big of a deal and companies are not doing it to piss on fans.