Sony hate thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Dom Cruise said:
What's going on now is not exactly the same as what happened with the PS3, the PS3 was a case of shoddy hardware but good software, the PS5 might be good hardware and it might be selling, but will it have good software? I don't know how you can look at TLOU2 and think everything's fine, what if we get more games like that with messages as hateful and full of shit? What if every Sony franchise has it's "Abby moment"? I don't want to support that, do you?
Click to expand...
We are fine. TLoU2 was just a flop, but every other title seems more than willing to deliver. Spider-Man was still great even with Miles, R&C looks fantastic, Dreams was great, Astro is literally a love letter to Sony, and Sackboy was a great return. Naughty Dog fell, sure it sucks that one of the biggest publishers had an oopsie, but don’t discredit all the hard working studios at Sony because one messed up.
 
SiccDicc said:
That doesn't change what I said that they moved Ghosts to fill a vacant spot. They had a blockbuster expected to release then, they needed something to release to offset the damage and lucked the fuck out with Ghosts selling like hotcakes. They didn't expect that, they had no idea it would. It was a new IP and corporations are very, very stubborn old dogs. Even if they get woke ticks infesting them they're still slow.

I have no ideological bent on this. I'm just sick of corporate cocksucking. Sony fucked up. There was no 4D Chess at play here. They didn't expect the leak and got caught on the toilet with their dick in their hands. You can't just magically shift shit like this, they likely knew they'd have to announce TBA long before they actually told us. Corporations are slow moving machines and they get slower the bigger they are. It's like watching paint dry.

To add to that, there have been a fuckton of horror stories coming from Naughty Dog about Druckmann that Sony blatantly ignored because they had faith in the franchise and the supposed genius behind the first game. Unaware that he needed a tard wrangler like Kojima and George Lucas did, only difference is that Druckmann has only ever produced mediocre shit and not the occasional glorious gem encrusted golden shit. So double whammy on Sony.
Click to expand...
I think we're arguing the same viewpoint, I'm not disagreeing with you it's just the order of technicalities.

Although Suckerpunch has a big pedigree behind it even back when they released their first game for the n64. I don't really think that's lucking out. They have competent people running the studio.

Usually a larger publisher will ignore the day to day drama at a smaller studio because it's not their job that would be the studio heads, only when deadlines are not kept do they get involved. They didn't involve themselves at all with the whole No man's Sky thing even though they were the ones who promoted the game to prominence. That's kinda the norm.
 
Last edited:
4ZURE said:
We are fine. TLoU2 was just a flop, but every other title seems more than willing to deliver. Spider-Man was still great even with Miles, R&C looks fantastic, Dreams was great, Astro is literally a love letter to Sony, and Sackboy was a great return. Naughty Dog fell, sure it sucks that one of the biggest publishers had an oopsie, but don’t discredit all the hard working studios at Sony because one messed up.
Click to expand...
I'm not discrediting them, I did really like Spider-Man and Miles didn't bother me, I'm really looking forward to R&C and God of War Ragnarok is probably going to be great if Cory Barlog is still behind it.

But as a fan of TLOU1 seeing that franchise get turbofucked, as well as Naughty Dog as a whole seemingly get turbofucked, is simply sad and makes me worried about the rest of Sony.

But Naughty Dog is Naughty Dog and the other devs are the other devs, on top of that Uncharted 4 did kind of feel like a "farewell" for Naughty Dog, so it won't be hard to just pretend it was their last game if need be.

You also have to remember that Naughty Dog was already not the exact same old Naughty Dog, the original 2 founders fucked off after Jak 3, then there was the Amy Henning era of Naughty Dog, which was cool too but it also ran it's course and if that's basically it well they had a good run, a lot longer than Incognito did, a short lived Sony studio I was a fan of, it just seems to be the nature of video games that things run their course and then it's on to something else, you either learn to roll with the changes or just give up on the hobby.
 
Marissa Moira said:
I think we're arguing the same viewpoint, I'm not disagreeing with you it's just the order of technicalities.

Although Suckerpunch has a big pedigree behind it even back when they released their first game for the n64. I don't really think that's lucking out. They have competent people running the studio.

Usually a larger publisher will ignore the day to day drama at a smaller studio because it's not their job that would be the studio heads, only when deadlines are not kept do they get involved. They didn't involve themselves at all with the whole No man's Sky thing even though they were the ones who promoted the game to prominence. That's kinda the norm.
Click to expand...
I figured we were arguing about Sony's competence regarding this entire ordeal, but anyways:

Except Naughty Dog isn't a smaller studio. If Sony is as competent as you're claiming them to be then they would have intervened sooner given the revolving door rate of the studio. No Man's Sky didn't have that problem. Instead, they did nothing. They actually sent false reviews - allegedly, I admit - to GlassDoor to make it seem like everything is hunky dory. Didn't work out too well, but gosh darn it they tried.

And Suckerpunch has a decent pedigree, but the problem is that it was a new IP. Those always, no matter the studio, tend to make investors nervous and that makes corporate nervous. Not only that, you have a western team in this political climate making a game about one of Japan's more intense historical moments? They got in trouble putting a white guy out playing a flute despite him being one of the few masters of the instrument in the entire world. That's gonna shake some nerves. Plus they didn't seem to get the special treatment Naughty Dog got, which was delay after delay, money sunk after money sunk, etc. They were never gonna shelve the game, they put too much into it and it was an established IP. The game itself could be dogshit at launch like Days Gone, they'd bank on people buying the game solely because of the name. The fact they kept delaying and it took a leak to release it? Nah, they weren't gonna shelve it and they were rewarding Druckmann for his "eccentricity". Also they made a licensing agreement with the TV show in order to drum up interest in the franchise to outsiders, that doesn't exactly say HOT POTATO!, to me. Actually, wouldn't be surprised if they TBA'd it to more closely coincide with the show.

And as I said, Sony either tried to screw over Sucker Punch with a surprise release date or it's been in the works for awhile with the knowledge there would be a TBA shift for the TLoU2 date. Sony probably figured it'd bring in RDR2 money or GTAV money given how long both those games took and gave Druckmann their blessings -- because golden boy syndrome exists. Sucker Punch were told of the shift ahead of schedule. The audience is always the last to learn when something is happening. Always.

Unless of course you leak it, but even then corporate does controlled leaks. This wasn't one of those of course, but it is what it is.
 
Dom Cruise said:
Poor Amy, first she got fucked by Wokeness with ND and then fucked by EA's bald faced greed, the two things that are killing video games dead.
Click to expand...
"Games as a service" is an inevitable consequence of rising development costs. If the price of a single game sold stays pretty much the same throughout the decades, companies had to look for other ways to keep afloat. This does not excuse EA but it's hardly pure greed in definition.
Wokeism and mob-virtue pandering has no place in this world, that much I agree.
 
ShitlordroltihS said:
I may be beating a dead horse but buy a fucking PC already. You'll be saving yourself a lot of money in the long run. Piracy and sales and all
Click to expand...
Honestly, I like having consoles for the exclusive content. I get the PC argument, but in a lot of ways, I kinda feel like consoles are still very good for gaming and push unique experiences. I think Ratchet would be a good example for PlayStation. Ratchet is a non-micrtransaction experience in a niche genre and it looks stunning. PlayStation put so much money behind something that, at this point in time, would either be low budgeted or have downloadable content up the ass. Platformers are a hard genre to sell now, you either end up an indie title like Hat in Time, or closed down like Toys for Bob. I think having to sell on a console has pushed titles like Odyssey, Ratchet, BOTW, etc. in ways that they would not have been had it just been a Triple A release.
 
Miller said:
Remember when he flexed on Twitter about firing a QA guy because he dared make a joke about one of his female characters?
Click to expand...
Honestly that story doesn't sound real.

I mean you would think that people higher up on the ladder like the artists would be the ones shooting the shit like that because they're directly working on the models and concept art.

A QA guy would be like the 1000th person in line to make a joke like that.
 
4ZURE said:
Honestly, I like having consoles for the exclusive content. I get the PC argument, but in a lot of ways, I kinda feel like consoles are still very good for gaming and push unique experiences. I think Ratchet would be a good example for PlayStation. Ratchet is a non-micrtransaction experience in a niche genre and it looks stunning. PlayStation put so much money behind something that, at this point in time, would either be low budgeted or have downloadable content up the ass. Platformers are a hard genre to sell now, you either end up an indie title like Hat in Time, or closed down like Toys for Bob. I think having to sell on a console has pushed titles like Odyssey, Ratchet, BOTW, etc. in ways that they would not have been had it just been a Triple A release.
Click to expand...
I dunno, the architecture of consoles are getting closer and closer to PC anyways and with it the games are getting easier to emulate, aren't they?

Exclusives may be a thing of the past.
 
Marissa Moira said:
Honestly that story doesn't sound real.

I mean you would think that people higher up on the ladder like the artists would be the ones shooting the shit like that because they're directly working on the models and concept art.

A QA guy would be like the 1000th person in line to make a joke like that.
Click to expand...
If I remember correctly the guy asked why they couldn't make the female characters attractive and Druckmann got angry and fired him.
 
Miller said:
If I remember correctly the guy asked why they couldn't make the female characters attractive and Druckmann got angry and fired him.
Click to expand...
I'd be angry too if I railed the mocap actor for Abby and someone said she wasn't hot. Calling me out for bad taste? Fuck that guy.
 
SiccDicc said:
I dunno, the architecture of consoles are getting closer and closer to PC anyways and with it the games are getting easier to emulate, aren't they?

Exclusives may be a thing of the past.
Click to expand...
Let’s be honest, a majority of people do not emulate. Exclusives are made to bring people to a platform, and Sony clearly pays top dollar to make things such as TLoU look pretty to appeal to general consumers. I think exclusives are healthy for gaming, people complain about the restrictiveness, but it being “the thing to sell the platform” really makes companies go all out with specific titles, and ones that are not main stream FPS multiplayer to boot.

Exclusives are less about the architecture but rather selling a platform. In a way, I guess it is giving you reason to get x pc over the other.
 
4ZURE said:
Let’s be honest, a majority of people do not emulate. Exclusives are made to bring people to a platform, and Sony clearly pays top dollar to make things such as TLoU look pretty to appeal to general consumers. I think exclusives are healthy for gaming, people complain about the restrictiveness, but it being “the thing to sell the platform” really makes companies go all out with specific titles, and ones that are not main stream FPS multiplayer to boot.

Exclusives are less about the architecture but rather selling a platform. In a way, I guess it is giving you reason to get x pc over the other.
Click to expand...
Imagine if Mario was on another platform. What would be the point of having a Nintendo console?
 
agility_ said:
"Games as a service" is an inevitable consequence of rising development costs. If the price of a single game sold stays pretty much the same throughout the decades, companies had to look for other ways to keep afloat. This does not excuse EA but it's hardly pure greed in definition.
Wokeism and mob-virtue pandering has no place in this world, that much I agree.
Click to expand...
I get that, but some of these companies really are just greedy, the story I read with Amy Henning and EA was she showed off Ragtag, which if you've seen the leaked footage, looked jaw dropping, to some EA exec and all he had to say "FIFA makes us X amount of money a year, where's your version of that?" as if EA, with all their sports game money, couldn't have funded Ragtag and eaten the cost even if it flopped (which it wouldn't have), that's just greed and plain and simple.

If you compare it to Hollywood and I know times have changed recently, but I'm just talking historically, Hollywood, being an older industry, cared about "prestige", ie winning Oscars, all the major studios would release "tentpole" pictures but they would also release "Oscar bait" pictures.

Meanwhile the video game industry does not give a single shit about the "artistic" side of video games, your companies like EA and Activision aren't releasing "Oscar bait" equivalent even though they absolutely could, they just don't care.

Sony is the only AAA publisher that cares about this, of course now we've run into the trouble of Wokeness, where people that do try to make "Oscar bait" equivalent games, the only thing they really have to say is "FUCK YOU GAMERGATE!" and that's it, it's not art.

But putting aside that issue and focusing on the rising cost of game development I'd be fine with new releases going up to 80$ if it meant better games and you'd actually save money in the long run if there was no "games as a service" spending.

I think one big factor though wasn't just the rising cost of development but the used games market, GameStop essentially becoming parasitical and selling brand new games as "used" just to cut the publishers and developers out of money, games probably could have stayed 60$ with no nickel and diming online costs if people consistently bought games new or at least waited a while before buying them used.

Miller said:
Remember when he flexed on Twitter about firing a QA guy because he dared make a joke about one of his female characters?
Click to expand...
What's weird is he wasn't always so super Woke, some of the Woke elements of Uncharted 4 we're thanks to some unnamed (but I'm sure she had dyed hair) female developer suggesting characters arbitrarily be changed to female just because, originally that old woman was supposed to be an old British male explorer which makes more sense given that trope and originally it was going to be Nathan's son instead of his daughter.

I assume that's why TLOU1 was good and Uncharted 4 was still good despite some flaws, but somewhere along the way the dude fully drank the Kool Aid and it's not hard to guess what the catalyst was, I'm sure it was the election of Donald Trump that made the dude lose his mind as it did for so many people.

I wonder what the original, pre-election story for TLOU2 was.
 
Dom Cruise said:
I get that, but some of these companies really are just greedy, the story I read with Amy Henning and EA was she showed off Ragtag, which if you've seen the leaked footage, looked jaw dropping, to some EA exec and all he had to say "FIFA makes us X amount of money a year, where's your version of that?" as if EA, with all their sports game money, couldn't have funded Ragtag and eaten the cost even if it flopped (which it wouldn't have), that's just greed and plain and simple.

If you compare it to Hollywood and I know times have changed recently, but I'm just talking historically, Hollywood, being an older industry, cared about "prestige", ie winning Oscars, all the major studios would release "tentpole" pictures but they would also release "Oscar bait" pictures.

Meanwhile the video game industry does not give a single shit about the "artistic" side of video games, your companies like EA and Activision aren't releasing "Oscar bait" equivalent even though they absolutely could, they just don't care.

Sony is the only AAA publisher that cares about this, of course now we've run into the trouble of Wokeness, where people that do try to make "Oscar bait" equivalent games, the only thing they really have to say is "FUCK YOU GAMERGATE!" and that's it, it's not art.

But putting aside that issue and focusing on the rising cost of game development I'd be fine with new releases going up to 80$ if it meant better games and you'd actually save money in the long run if there was no "games as a service" spending.

I think one big factor though wasn't just the rising cost of development but the used games market, GameStop essentially becoming parasitical and selling brand new games as "used" just to cut the publishers and developers out of money, games probably could have stayed 60$ with no nickel and diming online costs if people consistently bought games new or at least waited a while before buying them used.


What's weird is he wasn't always so super Woke, some of the Woke elements of Uncharted 4 we're thanks to some unnamed (but I'm sure she had dyed hair) female developer suggesting characters arbitrarily be changed to female just because, originally that old woman was supposed to be an old British male explorer which makes more sense given that trope and originally it was going to be Nathan's son instead of his daughter.

I assume that's why TLOU1 was good and Uncharted 4 was still good despite some flaws, but somewhere along the way the dude fully drank the Kool Aid and it's not hard to guess what the catalyst was, I'm sure it was the election of Donald Trump that made the dude lose his mind as it did for so many people.

I wonder what the original, pre-election story for TLOU2 was.
Click to expand...
domcruse.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom