PSUni writes "Just like that, we're all out of E3 conferences. Sony and Nintendo both had impressive showings that really put Microsoft to shame, but it shouldn't be too difficult to figure out which conference we'll be putting our focus on. I expected to have quite a few more misses, if only because I was nervous about Move after the terrible showing Kinect had at Microsoft's show yesterday. Turns out that Sony's keynote ended up being rock solid throughout, so I can't make any snarky comments I spent all night writing."
Today EA hosted its Investors Day, and Chief Executive Officer Andrew Wilson talked about the company's dedication to generative AI.
He's so excited to layoff more employees for FAKE STUPIDITY computer programing to replace them.
Hopefully EA takes a nosedive just like Ubisoft is currently doing. Lack of money is the only thing that can hurt them and possibly change them.
Knowing EA, I think they're more likely to sell their games cheaper or make Access the only way to play their titles than change course. They seem committed to destroying their labour force.
And the sad part here is that the proof of concept is there, where games can be made using AI.
I hate to say it, but those working in the gaming industry might be cooked. And unfortunately, I'm doubting most people will care as long as they get games they want. EA would absolutely dangle Dead Space 4 or a new Burnout in front of us, developed with AI. I wouldn't take it, but I think most fans would.
If AI does a better job then yeah why not? Though, I have massive doubts it will. If developers aren't willing to put effort in their games then they shouldn't be surprised that they're replaceable.
Damn, a new Burnout, don't even bring that up. It hurts just to read those words.
The indie scene is massive theses days, but the big budget scene is mostly trash. I wouldn't mind to see these big publishers suffer or crumble away.
But that can only happen when the casual gamer stops buying yearly roster updates or whatever garbage is marketed to them on TV.
CantThinkOfAUsername,
I disagree. I don't believe the developers are at fault here. I would think those people don't like what EA is doing, but it's EA and they have tremendous power in the industry. Not everyone has the leadership qualities to peel off and form their own company. Add to the fact that falling out of grace with EA might just be an industry kiss of death. These people don't have any power, so I really don't agree with saying they're not willing to put in the effort.
Hopefully, the only people who're going to be replaced by an AI are Andrew Wilson and his top management goons.
Of course it is. EA has been lazy for years. Profiting for investors and themselves without putting in the work. Having AI write code or build graphics for them just makes them even more lazy.
I'd laugh if those same investors built "executive code" and got rid of EA's CEO and board of directors and replaced them with AI.
Today Electronic Arts hosted its Investors Day and its executives shared what's next for the Battlefield franchise.
ohh god, here we go!
This is exactly why the gaming industry is failing. It's now an industry of suits "trying to find the fun".
...I'll help you out a little, If you're trying to find it, then it's not fun and neither are you. move on!
I disagree, tbh. I definitely wouldn't classify Vince Zampella as a soulless suit. It's kind of an acknowledgement that Battlefield fell off which is why they had to bring him in in the first place. He's probably the best shot EA has of making this franchise fun again.
From a software development perspective, what I read in the article of Zampella's approach of being able to easily playtest and iterate from early on in development is a good thing. That's likely a big part of why his COD games and Titanfall were so fun.
Calling Zampella a suit lol! People like Zampella are the half suits if you will, they bridge the gap between art and business. Suits don't care how fun a game is, they only care about profit margins.
It's people like you that's ruining the gaming platform, negativity already before it's even dropped
20 years ago, Bungie used to have the motto "making games we want to play", if the devs are having fun it's a good sign it's going to be an enjoyable experience. If the devs are worried about shareholders, quotas, fitting in with current trends and trying to make a small percentage of the population happy, it's not an encouraging sign.
Honestly, get them to sit down and play Bad Company 2 together.
If they can't see why that had the magic, they shouldn't be game developers.
TSA writes: While the PlayStation 5 has been the runaway winner of the generation, running laps around Xbox for the last few years, it's been a pretty bumpy ride.
I disagree... Sony may make a bad decision now and then, but to say "keep making" implies they are doing it all the time. That is MS who does that. And to be honest, Sony gives every idea a chance, no matter how good or bad the end result turns out. The "bad decisions" are more associated with the teams who come up with them than Sony who just lets them do their thing.
100% agree.
One thing I like about Sony is they at least give it a try. No matter how much some fans disagree, they always take chances.
I mean look at Concord and Astrobot.
Two completely different games.
Concord is the whole point of the article and no one wanted it and no one is playing it.
They should have researched how the fanbase would react to it.
Would the game be better as a f2p model or paid.
100 million or more spent, they could atleast have done that.
I think people forget the original Uncharted opening month only sold 50,000, but, Sony believed in the series and built it up from nothing.
They could have been complacent and said no to TLOU when Uncharted blew up too.
It’s ok to make bad decisions, the important thing is to learn from them and improve from there.. grants you more respect
Jim Ryan steered them off course with the GaaS BS, and once you start up several projects and dump hundreds of millions into them, you have to try to at least make something back off of them. Now that these games are releasing, we can start to move past them, and back to what made Sony so great to begin with.
Concord was made by a studio that Sony bought a year ago. This entire article makes no sense in that context.
Concord wasnt a chance it was a idiotic cash grab that was 5-7 years too late to the hero shooter genre...a chance would be creating a game in a genre that wasn't established
But people blasted Microsoft when they let the redfall devs “do
Their thing” lol
Big difference in waiting a decade for a new AAA ip from Microsoft for it to be redfall vs A game that got hammered non stop from the beginning from Sony.
Huge difference.
Let them do their own thing? Lol Microsoft had them rush it outdoor when clearly they needed more time and according to reports many of the devs left during development because they didn't want to make a multi-player game.
Yeah like how everyone busted Sony for the same thing.
But also Sony didn’t really hype up concord. It was already blasted to hell.
Now MS hyped up redfall fully knowing it was ass.
Also red fall was really bad at launch unlike concord.
The only thing that saved red fall from having the same fate as concord was game pass. If Sony put concord on plus it would have a way more active fan base and be alive still
For me redfall is far worse then concord.
@pwn
Sony didn't hype Concord? Open and closed beta, tons of advertising. They even spent the money to get it featured on that upcoming Amazon tv show - Secret Level. They outright bought the studio.
The hundreds of millions of dollars Sony spent around the Concord IP says otherwise.
Thenamelessone.
I rarely saw any ads for concord, compare to other games like god of war, spider etc. tons of advertising??? Literally just normal advertising for a game they own.
Open and close beta, of course they will do an open beta. It’s a multiplayer game. Has any multiplayer game not have that?? The purpose of it is to work out the kinks that people didn’t like. That is not hyping a game up. Your reaching.
They literally just released how a normal multiplayer game should be. of course they will market a game they own, it’s literally their job to do so, but they did not overhype it to be something more then it was.
Redfall had more advertising then concord and that’s fact.
Ok, Redfall and Concord are totally different problems.
Redfall was rushed by Microsoft so much that the game was completely and obviously unfinishe. You might remember they had to put a sticker on the box because it didn't have the promised 60FPS mode, as well as the game being so broken the games enemy AI didn't work as well as textures that took minutes to fully load and many other problems, the game was barely even a beta build on release.
Concord was a fully finished and highly polished game that consumers simply didn't want. The game was not bad on the technical level at all, it was 100% made to Sony's highest standards.
@pwnmaster3000
I think I only ever saw one or two ads before Concord released, and even then, I saw more from streamers talking about the game, otherwise it's like this game barely existed, or at least the marketing barely existed.
Jim Ryan has been a complete sh*t show from the very start. In fact, this whole Gen has been maybe the weakest I’ve seen since… well, ever for Sony. I thought with Jimbo out things would be brighter, but… well, we’ve got a bunch more GaaS coming our way. Let’s just hope it gets balanced out with their stellar traditional games.
Frankly, we shouldn't really care if they do GaaS. Why not?
The issue, for me, is having the very competent non-GaaS studios work on GaaS. If they want Haven to do Fairgame$, I really don't care. Bungie can make Destiny and Marathon forever. But when you try to get Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch, Insomniac, Guérilla, etc etc on that?
Now we have a problem.
@DarXyde
What is the point of the GaaS business model vs just making a traditional game? I guess the real question is why would you choose to develop GaaS games? I’ll give you a hint, it’s to f*cking continuously milk consumers through recurring revenue on a budget stretched thin over years.
The model is disgusting and quite frankly it’s some Frankenstein’d concept stemmed from the mobile game design model. I don’t care how fun a GaaS game is, it’s a model that is the cancer of this industry and the fact that they keep forcing it after failure after failure is revolting.
Mate, I'm not a fan of GaaS games. I also don't like online multiplayer or first person shooters.
So what do I do?
Avoid all of them. I just pretend they don't exist. And really, I don't care for the studios making them either. Never played a Treyarch, Bungie, or whatever game I couldn't just tune out.
Same deal. Allow them to exist, but don't engage. They can be super scummy pay to win models, but we've got to let the community decide. Sony has already learned the hard way that a great single player studio doesn't mean they're a great GaaS studio.
I think they're learning the lessons quickly, really. Even if they still have some GaaS in the pipeline, we see how quickly they pulled the plug on Concord. They've been letting Insomniac cook, so I tend to believe they're being cautious and not letting their golden geese make those games.
why do I get the impression that no one actually reads the articles anymore.
Read the article.
You don’t keep making bad decision when you just released one of the best games of the generation.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this. I don't want to even guess what's next. For all I know we could finally divide by zero. And the Mc Flurry machine will work at every Mc Donald's.
I don't even know what's going on anymore, it seems like dumb decisions all around despite clear warning signs, from Microsoft/Sony, from multiple developers, etc... The entire gaming landscape is just baffling at the moment.
The writer's take on PSVR -- totally true. But it's not just PSVR; for whatever reason all the VR companies just don't invest and support the platform like they should. Even the mighty Oculus Quest 2 + 3 have oddly feeble software support. I see mostly the same games and apps on the store now as I did 3 years ago. PSVR is another one of Sony's "abandonware" examples (along with Vita, PS TV, etc. etc.) that are just head scratchers. Like why even develop and release a piece of hardware if you're not going to support it? I don't know.
But the writer isn't correct about the Portal. That one has been a success I think. It works pretty well, and lots of people love it. Now notably, that one doesn't require much ongoing support from Sony -- it has one purpose and it does it fine enough -- so maybe that has helped.
VR companies are appropriately investing in and supporting the platform. VR is still niche, generally uncomfortable to wear, difficult with glasses ,still causes motion sickness, and requires a play space that a lot of people don’t have.
They've definitely fumbled hard in the live service space (buying Bungie, the utter failure of Concord, spending years on Factions 2 just to cancel it), Even Helldivers 2, which was a hit at launch, has lost most of its user-base due to weak post-launch support.
Other than that though, they've been doing well.
Spoiled and arrogant. PSVR failures should have resulted in a house cleaning. The Discord Sony team should be fire...lots of talent on the market.
"Sony Move will be $49"
*crowd roars with applause*
"and the navigation controller will be $29"
*crickets*
As great as that Kevin Butler monologue was they could have used that time showing gameplay or announce a new game, the ending was good when the good games went on but other then that it wasn't as great as it could have been. Both Sony and MS should feel ashamed of themselves with such poor showing.
While the conference wasn't bad, they didn't really announce much. I mean honestly, I don't care about a new host for the PSP. And that went on for a good 20 minutes. Considering the majority of the games they showed off were already announced and covered before the conference itself, I didn't really have any wow moments at this one. The only titles I can think of that were new for the PS3 were Twisted Metal, Portal 2 and The Sly Collection.
Aside from that they mostly showed off the Move, which honestly I don't care about, and the same goes for Kinect. Also, yes... they did have a lot of talking at points where they could have been showing off games.
That's all I wanted. More games.
Sony obviously showed the best games.
Nintendo "won" based on rehashes of old franchises.
Will the new Zelda be as good as The Last Guardian? Okami? Even 3D Dot Game Heroes? Probably not.
Will Donkey Kong Country Returns be as good as DKC2?
No.
Will Kirby: Epic Thread be anywhere near as fun as Little Big Planet 2?
Haha...no.
That doesn't matter though!!!
Due to nostalgia, Nintendo got away with murder today.
That is the truth. Deny it if you want to.
Funny thing,nostalgia.
I am inclined to agree,not sure about truth and denial but I agree with your assessment.