Why Is Sony Allowing These Terrible Games Onto The PSN Store?

Shaz Mohsin says: "So imagine you created something like Super Meat Boy, or Shovel Knight, and you finally were able to get it onto the PSN store, or Xbox, or Steam, or…okay maybe not Nintendo. But the number of downloads and purchases you were expecting, or maybe even promised, was cut in half or a quarter. Simply because your game was lost underneath the trash heap of games that flood these marketplaces.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
PhoenixUp495d ago

When you let Goat Simulator and I Am Bread through, one must question the standards of any online distribution store

Genuine-User494d ago (Edited 494d ago )

Some people enjoy games like the ones you have mentioned.

To answer the author, I guess one could blame the lack of curation on PSN. That said, let's not exaggerate the amount of shit games you can find on PSN or Xbox store, it's not even a fraction of the trash you can download on steam.

RpgSama494d ago

Sony or Ms or Nintendo don't care if a game is "terrible", that's up to the customer, what they do care and do quality control in 90% of the cases is if it's broken or if it breaks the console, that's it

EddieNX 493d ago

The quality control has improved ten fold under kimishima , its gotten a lot better.

tee_bag242493d ago

At least Steam has refunds though.

PSN_ZeroOnyx493d ago


I got a refund from Sony for the CoD Ghosts Season Pass nearly 6 months after purchase and DLing 2 map packs.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 493d ago
_-EDMIX-_494d ago

Why would it be better to not have options?

What would benefit you to have those games not appear if you where never going to buy them in the first place?

rocketpanda494d ago

Because quality control and store curation is important.

_-EDMIX-_494d ago

@Rock- no thank you. I don't need Sony or Valve or MS etc telling me what I should play or not.

I have a brain and youtube and google exist.

Who is someone else to tell me what I should or shouldn't play?

Let consumers determine that "quality control" with their damn wallets. If they like a game, they buy it, if they hate it...then they don't buy it.

Pretty damn simple.

GamingIVfun494d ago (Edited 494d ago )

More stupid click bait, even more so since this story is piggy backed on Sony and Playstation. All are guilty of allowing poorly developed games on there respective online stores, Xbox Live are just as guilty of allowing bad games (bad games as in matter of opinion) as Playstation is. Steam being probably the worst. Even Nintendo has, to a much lesser extent.

He extremely exaggerates the problem on Playstation, exaggeration or knowingly lying, you be the judge of that.

Gamist2dot0494d ago

True, all subjective, shitty games have their audience like every other game. I would never touch Minecraft but that game sells multil millions.

rainslacker494d ago

quality control is important, and it exists in the form of compliance standards which all these games have to meet.

Curation, that isn't important beyond the nature of the in it can't be pornographic or something along those lines.

Curation of that the quality itself sucks is extremely subjective, and while there are objective ways to analyze something, it should not be up to any console maker, or store front to decide if something is good enough for people to play. These companies are not me. These companies are not their user base. These companies are not reviewers of games. These companies offer a store front, and standards that the game has to run within their standards of operation.....they are not about deciding what is good or bad on the content side. Such things only restrict potential growth of gaming as a whole.

The downside is that we will get crap, but the upside far outweighs the down.

mogwaii494d ago (Edited 494d ago )

Just because you enjoy sifting through shit doesnt mean we all should.

chris235494d ago

a bit of a higher niveau. a psn store where you don't have to triple check what kind of quality you're getting. because nice marketing videos in this day and age everybody is able to do.

IamTylerDurden1493d ago

Right, like u won't be able to find your name brand AAA bc Goat Simulator exists...

ninsigma493d ago

Totally agree with you edmix. Who is anyone to say that a game shouldn't belong on the store because it's bad?? It's not for them to decide that we wouldn't like a game, it should be up to us. As long as the game does not compromise the system, let the consumers choose.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 493d ago
Christopher494d ago

But Goat Simulator is a great game...


KillZallthebeast494d ago

You lost me at goat simulator and I am bread. Both of those can be fun, and drinking games are possible for both

BlackTar187494d ago

I am bread is awesome and Goat Simulator I haven't tried but it's fun.

InKnight7s494d ago

Nintendo Ds and 3ds games for me is one of lowest standard and even below for most of it? Still it is my utility and my point of view doesnt make them bad games or not valid. Better example Minecraft is vomting of video game industry still its good for other.

eddieistheillest494d ago

Goat Simulator is great , what are you talking about ?

rainslacker494d ago (Edited 494d ago )

To me, the console makers SHOULD NOT be the proprioters of deciding if a game is good or not, nor set standards on what kind and of what quality of game can be on their store front. That isn't their place.

The console makers, or Steam, or whoever, only obligation is to make sure the game itself will run on their respective system.

Discovery wouldn't be significantly increased just because they got rid of the supposed crap. Discovery is entirely on the developer or publisher to provide from their marketing. For the most part, if you go on the store, the liklihood that you'll simply see something just because some crap is taken out(and a mountain is hyperbole from this author), is no better than before.

What we have on the storefronts is nowhere near as bad as it is on mobile, and good games get discovered all the time. Bad games get overlooked. Often times good games get overlooked too. This happens regardless of the quality of the game, and many AAA or quality mid-tier games that aren't from small devs go overlooked as well. Sometimes this happens with games that have a decent marketing campaign, and has really nothing to do with what else is out there most of the time....even during times when some huge game is releasing.

Now, since this article seems to want to look at this from a developers perspective to frame it's argument....I know....the poor devs would some dev who poured countless hours into a project feel just because Sony, or whoever, came around and said, "Sorry your game sucks, you can't sell it here".

Here are some serious questions that need to be considered before ever considering what this article is putting forth.

1. What metric would be used for these companies to make such a decision on quality?

2. How devastating would it be to the industry as a whole if you get just one exec or judge of quality that decides to push an agenda? Someone makes a high quality sexy style visual novel that redefines the genre....but said exec thinks it sucks because it's "too sexy" and would offend people, game banned. I'd like to think this wouldn't happen, but history proves that abuse happens.

3. How much support are you likely to get if there is even the chance that years of development could go out the window just because the console maker has the ultimate say on if it could be sold. Isn't the more likely scenario that people would rather take the more likely scenario of not risking the loss of investment by being denied at the last minute, and then the system itself would just get the games much later after they've proven themselves on the market.....

and 4 to followup on #3. Wouldn't that lack of being on the marketplace in the first place because the devs had to use their resources wisely actually just prevent them from getting sales either way, hence negating the supposed losses due to lack of discovery?

opinionated494d ago

goat simulator is quality though.

mixelon493d ago

Those are both actually well thought out titles. It’s the shitty mobile ports and games seemingly made by kids that make things bad.

Angeljuice493d ago

"Goat Simulator" and "I am bread" are perfectly acceptable titles. I don't like "Super Meat Boy" or "Shovel Knight" but wouldn't suggest you remove them.

Choice is good, some of the most enjoyable games I've played have had poor review scores and weren't popular at all.

rainslacker493d ago

Quite a few games I enjoy don't usually get good reviews, because they tend to fall into the niche Japanese titles. I'd hate to think that they could be banned, just because social trends change, and suddenly those games suck because they offer up copious fan service.

It's bad enough that publishers are censoring them for the western releases, I don't need console makers bowing to anyone's notion on what makes a good game.

bradleejones493d ago

Goat Simulator is a riot. My kids have it. May as well be Grand Theft Auto with goats. lol

PSN_ZeroOnyx493d ago (Edited 493d ago )

I can't justify purchasing Goat Simulator or I Am Bread. However, I have a buddy over on Xbox who swears Goat Simulator is one of the funnest and funiest games he has ever played. I just can't see it though.

admiralvic493d ago

Standards are great and they work well on a very basic level, like not allowing games that can damage your image, but standards like you're talking about is bad.

Unless there are very specific things that can get something banned, it's bad to have someone just decide this is okay and that isn't. Like if they said no sex and The Witcher 3 was too sexy, XYZ platform would miss out on that game. Likewise, if you say no low quality graphics, there are people who think sprites qualify and if they say no, there goes Enter the Gungeon, Rogue Legacy, Undertale, The Binding of Isaac and a lot of other games.

Once they make exceptions, like "Enter the Gungeon is a good game," the implicit meaning is that you have a bad game and it reflects poorly on companies.

In the end, there is no advantage to doing this stuff, outside of having fewer options. If anything, at the cost of removing some games you dislike and likely keeping others for one reason or another, it opens up the potential for us to miss out on something great.

OtakuDJK1NG-Rory493d ago

It's too bad I Am Bread isn't called I Am The Bread.

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 493d ago
ObviousGoldfish494d ago

Games are more dumbed down than Smash Bros

Sgt_Slaughter494d ago

You couldn't have made a worse comparison if you tried, bud.

sloth3395494d ago

Guess you don't know shovle knight was on Nintendo first since you said maybe not Nintendo

Sgt_Slaughter494d ago (Edited 494d ago )

*misread the comment, ignore this*

Even got two addition expansions, and was released on pretty much every platform imaginable in the last year or so.

NotoriousWhiz494d ago

I think his point was that the percentage of junk games on the Nintendo eshop is higher than the other consoles. And on that, I agree. I can't speak for Steam though since I don't really use it.

OtakuDJK1NG-Rory493d ago (Edited 493d ago )

Well the author is still wrong. Steam has the most junk games. 3DS would only has more because it have over 1000 games. But combining the Wii U and Switch wouldn't do much to the number

Elda494d ago (Edited 494d ago )

It's called diversity & business,what one may think is trash the other may think it's treasure.

Tetsujin494d ago


Just because the majority bandwagon off someone elses opinion doesn't make any game good/bad. People are entitled to their own opinions; and if there's the one out of many who don't agree, doesn't make them any better/worse than the rest. There's a lot of games I find to be utter trash, while the Internet and fans swear it's the second coming, at 95+ score(s).

SolidGear3494d ago

Yeah, that's how I feel about every GTA game yet I've enjoyed games like Duke Nukem Forever and Mirror's Edge: Catalyst immensely.

MetalGearsofWar494d ago

Fully agree. A certain exclusive comes to mind.

FPSFox494d ago

He shows a horse racing game you can get on Android for free that costs 15.00 on PSN... That's adds nothing of value to the marketplace and can even damage sales of more deserving games that get buried under trash.

Christopher494d ago

On Android for free with in game app purchases. There is a huge difference.

rainslacker494d ago

The notion that a lot of these games suck stems from the way they look, not in the way they play. Some people don't get that a lot of these apparently crap games suck ass.

In other instances, just because people don't think a game is worth playing, they'll go on about how it's crap, and worse, act like it shouldn't exist.

Games like Gone Home sucked a** on every measurable level. It had no redeeming qualities. But, there were those that wanted the game to exist, and that wanted to play it, and there are those that thought it was good. If one of these store fronts decided that couldn't happen, imagine the PR backlash they'd get from those that wanted to prop up the game. Imagine how we would never be able to show that some games are considered good because they force an agenda. Imagine how many devs may not be willing to take risks with something of that nature because they would fear their efforts wouldn't amount to much.

While I know we can discuss Gone home and it's "right to exist" from many different angles, the fact remains, that is for us to decide, not Sony, MS, Steam, Apple, Google, or any other storefront provider.

mixelon493d ago

This is a weird one, as shovelware is a thing and games that aren’t up to a level of technical proficiency do make the store look bad.

Watching the video he gives good examples. Black tiger is ridiculous.

narsaku493d ago

Diversity is compromise, and compromise puts a smile on nobody's face.

Putting 200 shitty games on a playstore that's horrifically designed is an awful idea. I'm really tired of scrolling hundreds of times extra through the sony library going through mobile/alpha indy crap.

rainslacker493d ago

Yet others don't feel the same way you do, and may want to scroll through a bunch of stuff looking for something good. Some of those horrifically designed games may be appealing to someone else.

And that's the problem with letting the company decide what will go on the store. Who do they appease? You? Me? That guy who buys nothing but "crap" games?

All these kinds of consumers exist, and as such, it's up to them to decide what they want. It may be an inconvenience for you, but it'd be an inconvenience to someone else who may want those games.

Who's more important in this scenario? Why is your opinion more important than the other guys?

It sounds more like what you want is a way to filter any search results to make your browsing easier, which is a fair request, because I'd like that too.

Elda493d ago

Again...what you think is garbage someone else may think it is not.Different strokes for different folks.No shade but the PS store is to please everyone not just you.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 493d ago
ASBO-5494d ago

Games like "Genital Jousting" have no place on a game system

Sgt_Slaughter494d ago

I mean it has a 9/10 average on Steam along with Very Positive ratings, as well as countless YouTube channels that played it. They could care less about opinions at this point since I imagine it sold well for what it is.

MetalGearsofWar494d ago

Most reviews are kids that want top comment. Have you read the actual reviews?

Elda494d ago

LOL!..I hear you but that's your opinion.

Christopher494d ago

That's not for any single person to decide. If you don't like it, don't buy it. That's like saying there shouldn't be PayPerView Porn shows on cable.

mixelon493d ago

Genital jousting is great with a bunch of players. It’s not shovelware and a lot of thought and talent has gone into it, lol..

As weird as it is.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 493d ago