The fact that the PlayStation camera won’t be sold in the same box as the PS4 raised some questions between the playerbase, and today Sony Worldwide Studios Shuhei Yoshida shed some light on the reasons behind the decision, also giving further info on what the SualShock 4 can do without it.
Shuhei Yoshida chats with FINAL FANTASY XVI Producer Naoki Yoshida.
PlayStation boss Shuehei Yoshida wants the gaming industry to continue to chase its creative dreams.
"Got that one right, Shu!"
Kind of ironic when Sony is focused on GaaS like never before.
Companies evolve overtime. Sony has implemented themselves in the single player space relatively well. Now they can expand further by doing more all while still giving us single player experiences. Obviously Shu is speaking on GaaS games being the main dominance of the gaming space and if that’s the future then that indeed sucks.
You can have that mindset all while still creating some GaaS titles.
Absolutely! Man all the freaking gaas games theyve been releasing...wait. Not a single one.
kinda ironic when it comes to xbox you xboys can even defeat einstein in explation why its good, when it comes to ps you guys became dumb and dumber..
How so? They're only after one or two good GaaS games, they're throwing crap at the wall until something sticks, alot of those games in development are going to languish and die shortly after release. They're still predominately focused on their core strategy of great single player games (look at the previous interview where they admit they cancel alot of games).
God why do Xbox gamers always love the thought of PlayStation being as crappy as Xbox.?
"Like never before" regarding GaaS is like saying "PS3 is a console that launched with HDD space like never before": it's a very low bar to clear because there isn't much precedent.
I happen to agree with Shu here. I don't think being a GaaS title is a scarlet letter, but I can't think of any live service games that have been great at launch either. Naughty Dog is looking likely break that trend. I'd say two love service titles at a time is the sweet spot. I suspect people can only deal with a limited number of live service games contemporaneously.
Lmaooo
People always criticize Sony because 90% of their exclusives are single player games. People say they are too expensive because of low replay value.
And you wanna pretend like Sony is focusing on Gaas? Their biggest games aren't Gaas unlike MICROSOFT.
How are Sony focused on GaaS?
They own Bungie and have Destiny but the majority of their titles are far from GaaS.
Why, if you are such a die hard Xbot, do you rush to comment on Sony related articles?
@obscure
Are you ok now we was worried about your mental health state when you disappeared for almost a week from bashing PlayStation articles.
Is the word DENIED still triggering you?
I haven’t read the article as my spam blocker always red flags that site and I don’t t want to risk it so a general comment it is 🤦🏿
We all know live services game and quality rarely goes together but some of them are fun to play
@Obscure, Sony is starting from a place of zero which requires a big initial investment to establish themselves in the live services market.
It's very much the opposite, Shu said this damn well knowing Sony is going hard on GaaS. This is Shu confirming that Single player games won't be effected at all despite them going into Live service.
Except they aren't really- they have what may be a live service game from Haven studios and firewalk studios, they have another from a second party dev and an fps game with multiplayer focus by deviation games, they counted Gt7 as a live service game but really it's not much different to how recent GT titles were treated, they have the last of us factions, a Horizon multiplayer game in production at guerilla alongside horizon 3, a new ip from Bungie. The rest of their studios seem to be hard at work on traditional singleplayer games that may also have a multiplayer mode or may not. So their live service titles are mostly in development from either new teams setup at existing studios or from acquisitions they have made which really just replace the capabilities they once had through Sony Online Entertainment until they sold it half a decade ago. Only I'd argue their new capabilities in this space would appear to be better and have higher quality talent than it did back then.
Shu I agree but right now Sony themselves are working on more than 5 live service games
He never said they were not working on any. He said, he doesn't want to see Gaming's Future dominated by live-Service Games. Sony currently has 25 games in development. 10 being live service games, with the other mostly likely being single player games and that is honestly a very good balance
I agree I just hope their live service games are not simple money grabs and try to do some good interesting things
"and that is honestly a very good balance"
The issue is, whether people want to admit it or not because it's Sony, but once a company gets a taste of that money GaaS games make the chances of them going money crazy becomes super higher
I know what you'll probably say
"bu bu but Sony wouldn't do that"
NO COMPANY is immune, even the best can fall and I really don't want to see that happen here.
The fact people will completely blow that off and pretend it's not even a possibility is worrying to me because that's how we end up shits creek.
They might be fine...they might go too far but at the moment I don't think it's a bad thing at all to be sceptical with the shit this industry has gone through in the past 10 years alone.
The thing is most of those 10 games won't even be viable, out of the 10 that actually get released, probably only 1 or 2 will make the big bucks worth continuing support. I think Sony even knows that, look at all the other GaaS games that release and die shortly after. Personally I'm okay with that because I don't want the market dominated with these games.
I'd actually rather the resources go on to making some more top-tier JRPGs, I feel like we don't get enough of those in the last couple of gens.
Final Fantasy
But keep in mind when those games fail many of the studios are shut and there are layoffs
I don't want a Gaas game. I just want a new socom. A strong multi-player title with no purchases beyond the initial purchase.
Yeah exactly what I was thinking
Not 1
Not a cheeky 2
But freaking 5
Like it’s not even a “we’ll try doing one and see how it goes”
@-Foxtrot What do you have against live service games. I’m not a fan of live service games, but multiplayer games can be done right just look at Titanfall before EA killed it. As long as PS’s core studios keep making single player games, everything should be fine.
Sony said they have 25 games in development. 10 being live service games, with the other mostly likely being single player games. They have more single player games in development
@__SteakDeck__
Urm....that they are a cancer in this industry
That the majority of them fail and the developers have then wasted years on them rather than other things.
They turn developers and publishers into thirsty little money grabbers where that big money is still not enough for them.
I could go on, defending GaaS games is not a hill to die on man, it's really not
"done right just look at Titanfall before EA killed it"
Titanfall 2 was not really a GaaS type of game compared to what we are getting now so that's a really bad example.
@-Foxtrot Yeah it seems like you just have a hatred for multiplayer games. I’m not the biggest fan of multiplayer games, but like I said they can be done well. Also Titanfall 1 had no single player it was multiplayer only and it’s now a dead game, but it was still good. So yes that is a good example.
@_SteakDeck_,
I'm still salty about Titanfall 2, it was one of the only multi-player games I actually liked.
Multi-player games don't have to be Gaas games. Look at Mario Kart, Splatoon. Nintendo's games most likely don't have Gaas because they're behind the times, but this is one area where it's better to be behind the times.
And? They still have single player games. Domination would completely ruled with live services which Sony should know to still do single player. On a side note they should also do a few 1st party smaller games like indie or AA. By the way is indie a single A game.
To be fair, so has many other companies aka Ubisoft for example and many of them they decided to end development on. Just because something is in the works does not mean it will release if they do not feel it will pan out. ATM all of the GaaS we know of from Sony are The Last of Us Factions, and some kind of Horizon (Monster Hunter like) game. Also keep in mind, they do own Bungie, and Destiny and there new project be it Destiny 3 and there new IP will likely be that. So just that on its own is near half of what we can best assume.
Main issue with GaaS now days is that its very over saturated. Keep in mind as well Battel Royal games are GaaS by nature also, hell CoD is GaaS. Halo Infinity, ditto. Really now days unless something is an honest to god single player game only the GaaS term gets over used.
Not sure if many played it (I loved it) Gun's Up was a GaaS for a long while, it was going to shut down till some youtubers gave it a bit of new life for another half of year. We know Sony Mobile is working on things and it not shock me if some of this stuff is targeted to the mobile market.
Right now Sony's biggest weakness I'd say is MP games. With that Firewalk studio from lots of vets they just acquired its quite likely there game will have GaaS stuff as part of it, that is still years down the line. I think everyone needs to chill out some and just wait and see what comes. We have not really got a real honest GaaS from Sony before this or even last gen really... At least as we know them now days. Such a broad term now.
He’s been at PlayStation since the beginning, and seen the games industry transform beyond recognition. He talks unlikely successes, AI, and gaming’s future.
i agree with absolutely everything he said about motion controls " I believe, and this is personal opinion, that for a technology to gain universal acceptance a certain degree of maturity is required. For instance touch control has been introduced a long time ago in machines like ATMs, but it wasn’t as easy to use as in today’s smartphones and tablets.
I think natural interfaces will spread in the future, but I believe we to need identify proper uses for them first." my thoughts exactly
im glad its not in the box. motion gaming is something i have no interest in, it would just raise the price for something i wont ever use
Thank God Sony Has A Brain Cause I Would Barely Use The Camera. But I Will Get It In The Long Run
Its the right thing to do by consumers.
There is no reason to force every PS gamer to pay $60 extra for something that they don't want.
If a PS gamer wants it then they should buy it.
Options is good.
SMART. Sony understands that gamers value choice over everything else, and that we're adverse to being forced to do anything. Not only that, it also makes the Sony camera dodge the HORRIBLE stigma the Kinect has.