Let’s look at the worst PlayStation 4 games and why they were considered so bad.
PlayStation has added a whopping 56 games to its PlayStation Cloud Gaming catalogue.
There are some big titles in the list, including Forza Horizon 5.
And this is right after they removed Resistance 1 & 2! Does anyone realize this?
(I tried to add it as a posting, but it was old news by the time I realized it)
Playstation cloud gaming? Wasn’t that PS Now until it merged with PS plus….
Can someone tell me what’s going on?
PS Cloud gaming was PS NOW before, now its the Premium tier (top one) of PLAYSTATION PLUS.
if you have PS+Premium you can cloud stream games onto a PS4 or PS5 or onto a PS Portal. The nice thing about being able to stream directly to a PS Portal is that you don't need your PS5 to be turned on and used to remote play.
PS NOW had a PC app, which sadly as far as i know is gone and PS+Premium has no app and no way to stream onto a PC.
The pc app is still there. You can use it to stream just like you used psnow.
You can stream all catalog games on PC and ps5
If you have ps+ premium you can stream from your pc and ps5 all the games from the catalog
It's not just the catalog. You can also stream alot ofthe games you have purchased as well.
I don’t understand cloud gaming. I’ve tried them all. Ps5, Portal, ROG Ally, XB cloud and no matter what I do I just can’t play the games because of the lag and artifacting that breaks immersion.
I have 1gb fiber that was freshly installed as well.
Local remote play works pretty good from PS and XB but strictly streaming the whole game from the cloud has been a mediocre experience for me and definitely not worth the higher cost sub.
Maybe your router? mine works fine even with stock router, but it works much better if I connect to deco.
Maybe, it’s brand new hardware a few months old but is generic isp hardware.
XB remote play local works amazing, and using my portal at home is flawless and runs like it was native.
But anything strictly played in cloud is so inconsistent.
Battle Engine Aquila joins PlayStation Plus Premium.
Another meh month and only 1 single classic wtf Sony. I was hoping after the price hikes for PSN we might get a good month spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down and all that
Sandland looks right up my alley and I'm excited to give it a shot. I honestly missed this game somehow, never heard about it until now.
Maybe I’ll go check out battlefield 5 again.
Maybe this will give a little boost
Some of the best psvr 2 titles leaving, nothing coming, way to support your psvr 2 owners. Still, I don't mind the games coming personally.
Yeah I upped to premium when they started adding psvr2 with the expectation that they would keep coming. now when my sub ends I'll be scaling back
Could PlayStation games and consoles see a price increase in the near future?
When PS5Pro released it was only $100 more expensive than the xbox series x. Now xbox series x is actually more expensive than the PS5Pro lol 😆
So yes the Pro will be getting a price increase imminently.
I think it’s pretty much inevitable. I don’t see Sony keeping the same prices while everyone else is raising theirs. The industry has been testing the waters for a while now with these other forms of increases such as ‘early access’ and ‘special editions’ of games. I always wait for games to go on sale so they’re not getting full price out of me.
Well there were articles on how Sony stock pilled PS5s in the states so i think they will go one holiday season without raising the prices in the US.
And death stranding 2 and Ghost of yotei(coming out in Oct) have announced prices of 70 so i think they are going to see what happens when they are the cheapest option this holiday.
Yeah, and i think the US gov also gave tariff exemptions for electronics. Although there’s still inflation to deal with, and logistics cost probably up significantly.
Replies(1)
I don't like paying a lot for games, but frankly, this needs to happen if the industry is going to improve.
Back in 2005, brand new releases of PS2 games usually cost £39.99 in the UK, with some going up to £45. Adjusting for inflation, that's between £70 and £80 today.
Then consider that in 2005, many games were being developed by teams of around 40. Nowadays, for games of the same 'tier', you're looking at 500+.
In addition, game development in 2005 tended to take around a year. Many of the big development teams were producing annual releases, or at least one game every 2 years. Average development time now is 3-4 years.
Working all that through, you can estimate that a single game as I've described above 'should' cost FAR more than £70. A quick bit of rough maths:
£40 × 10 (increase in employees) × 3 (development years) = £1200.
Obviously, that's unrealistic, as basic economics tells you that market demand is one of the greatest driving forces behind pricing products. But it still makes you think...
Thank GOODNESS we're not paying more than £80 any time soon...
No thanks. More people are switching to PC gaming since it's more affordable. Graphics aren’t the main concern anymore. Affordable motherboards, RAM, and CPUs can last for years, and upgrading the GPU each generation makes it a worthwhile investment. There are no limitations with PC gaming.
Plus, PC games are cheaper, especially when bought from 3rd party key sellers, and there's no need to rely on monthly or yearly subscriptions
Your argument is fundamentally flawed. Inflation alone doesn’t dictate game prices. Development efficiency has improved, with outsourcing, AI tools, and modular design offsetting increased team sizes and longer development cycles. The idea that prices should scale linearly with employee count and years spent is absurd—games don’t cost 30 times more just because they take three times as long to develop. Your math ignores the actual economic forces at play, like mass market appeal, competition, and diversified revenue streams. Pricing is dictated by demand, not a raw cost equation, and companies balance expenses through digital sales, DLCs, and microtransactions. If games were priced at £1200, the industry wouldn’t improve—it would collapse. The £70–£80 range isn’t some act of generosity; it’s the optimal price point to maximize profits while keeping consumers engaged. Your conclusion misses the actual mechanics of the market entirely.
I agree, and suggesred as much. But I was approaching it from the perspective of the employees, of whom there are now many more, working more years for the same release.
Thankfully, gaming has become more mainstream, which is what has kept the cost low for such a long time. Games now sell in far greater numbers, which keeps the cost low. But as this growth slows (as is inevitable), we should expect to see the cost rise.
Back then, there was Play.com, games going for well under £20. Best to sit back and let games age and pick them up cheaper, but some used games can sell for more. That also pays off waiting for complete editions. It's probably the oldest debate in gaming, the price of games. PS4 games rising to £60 was a shocker. There's definitely a gaming crash coming, yet Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft don't seem to be bothered. They only see £ and $ signs then wonder how it all went wrong.
Stating a game is a wait for a sale disqualifies it as a "worst" game. If Knack and Order 1886 are two of the worst games last gen it's no wonder why PS4 was so good.
Oh, c'mon! Knack wasn't that bad. It wasn't that groundbreaking, but it was hella fun
Only flaws with the order was that it was too short, and they reused boss fights. Other then that it played EXACTLY like Gears, wich was hauled as the second coming for its cover based shooting mechanic. Sadly it was a launch title, so the gaming media just carried over their bias from PS3 era right to PS4.
wow
the order and knack are on there?
out of all ps4 gamesz those two shpuld not be in any top 10 list of bad ps4 games. like at all
Hello Neighbor is the worst game in PS4 IMO. Worst game I've ever played.