> Sony Might Sell More Consoles But They’re Still Competing Like Its 2004

Jason Schreier at Bloomberg:

Sony Corp.’s Visual Arts Service Group has long been the unsung hero of many hit PlayStation video games. The San Diego-based operation helps finish off games designed at other Sony-owned studios with animation, art or other content and development. But about three years ago, a handful of influential figures within the Visual Arts Service Group decided they wanted to have more creative control and lead game direction rather than being supporting actors on popular titles such as Spider-Man and Uncharted. Michael Mumbauer, who took over direction of the Visual Arts Service Group in 2007, recruited a group of about 30 developers, internally and from neighboring game studios, to form a new development unit within Sony. The idea was to expand upon some of the company’s most successful franchises and the team began working on a remake of the 2013 hit The Last of Us for the PlayStation 5. But Sony never fully acknowledged the team’s existence or gave them the funding and support needed to succeed in the highly competitive video game market, according to people involved. The studio never even got its own name. Instead, Sony moved ownership of the The Last of Us remake to its original creator, Naughty Dog, a Sony-owned studio behind many of the company’s best-selling games and an HBO television series in development.

Speaking as a consumer: I’m not sure how many people would want this. There’s no doubt that The Last of Us was a fantastic game and , I’m sure eventually, worthy of a remake. But the game came out so late in the Playstation 3’s life cycle that a remaster was released, literally, almost a year to the day later for the Playstation 4. While I’m sure it would’ve looked great this would’ve been seen as a cash grab by Sony, which it totally would’ve been. There’s literally no need for third remaster/remake for a game that came out only 8 years ago and already had a remaster done just 7 years ago. If anything, Sony needs to get its backwards compatibility act together. That remake in 2014 could’ve been completely avoided.

Speaking as a developer: Even if this wasn’t green lighted as a project it shows Mumbauer believes in his team and was willing to prove they’re more than a proverbial practice squad (to use NFL parlance). Even if it wound up not being more than a tech demo they could’ve found another title for them to remake.

For their first solo project, Mumbauer and his crew wanted to pitch something that would be well received by their bosses at Sony. Recognizing the risks and expense involved with developing a new game from scratch, they decided to focus on remaking older games for the new PlayStation 5. Remakes are considered a safe bet since it’s cheaper to update and polish an old game than it is to start from scratch, and they can be sold both to nostalgic old fans and curious new ones. The team originally planned on a remake of the first Uncharted game, released by Naughty Dog in 2007. That idea quickly fizzled because it would be expensive and require too much added design work. Instead, the team settled on a remake of Naughty Dog’s 2013 melancholic zombie hit, The Last of Us. At the time, Naughty Dog was in the thick of development on the sequel, The Last of Us Part II, which would introduce higher-fidelity graphics and new gameplay features. If Mumbauer’s crew remade the first game to have a similar look and feel, the two games could be packaged together for the PlayStation 5. In theory, this would be a less expensive proposition than remaking Uncharted, since The Last of Us was more modern and wouldn’t require too many gameplay overhauls. Then, once Mumbauer’s group had established itself, it could go on to remake the first Uncharted game and other titles down the road.

Uncharted is in desperate need of a remaster and it would potentially breathe new life into the series. I mean its old. Really old. 2007 old. It needs a fresh coat of paint. A remake might get people to play a Playstation exclusive that haven’t played it yet, selling more Playstations. Anyone who has might consider buying it for nostalgia and a prettier game.

Why not just get your backwards compatibility right and bundle them anyway using the PS4 version? If it’s one thing Microsoft is absolutely doing right with the Xbox consoles its backwards compatibility. Even more so with the One to Series X|S compatibility this generation. The whole backwards compatibility thing really is just Sony being greedy. These systems have the compute power to run emulation software and that’s exactly what Microsoft has been doing since the original Xbox One. If that machine can do it theres no reason a Playstation 4, and especially a 5, can’t.

But pivoting from doing finishing work for other games to making your own is difficult, since original development teams are “competing against hundreds of other teams from all over the world, with varying levels of experiences and successes,” said Dave Lang, founder of Iron Galaxy Studios, which has served as a support team and a development studio. “The people funding the work are often risk-averse, and if they have to pick between a team that’s done it before, and someone trying to do it on their own for the first time, I can see why some people pick the prior developer over the latter,” he said.

Sony is essentially taking a play right out of Nintendo’s playbook. Keep all your exclusives, quite literally, exclusive. While that works for Nintendo I’m not sure it works as well for Sony. Nintendo has beloved characters that became franchises. People associate Mario or Link with Nintendo and vice versa And while it would be great for gamers to be able to play their classic games on stuff other than Nintendo hardware, it would be seen as a loss for Nintendo. That their hardware just wasn’t good enough. I don’t quite get this sentiment for for any of Sony’s franchises. I dont think of Uncharted or God of War and think “Sony” or “Playstation” like I think of Nintendo when I think of Zelda or Mario or Metroid. Double for stuff like The Last of Us. If anything with those franchises I think of the developer first, not the hardware it runs on. Maybe part of that is that Nintendo is the developer as well as the platform. Almost all of those classic Nintendo titles were developed and published by Nintendo. Something Sony doesn’t seem to have. It seems like a lot of those old titles, like Twisted Metal and Warhawk from back in the day, were never developed directly by Sony even if they were published by Sony.

Microsoft however is treating things just a little differently. They still have their exclusivity but to a point. Where I can’t buy God of War or The Last Of Us on Steam, I absolutely can buy Halo. I can also buy it on the Microsoft store on my PC. Same with Gears of War. I can play them on my PC as well. They’re still exclusive in the sense that I can only play them on Microsoft owned platforms. Windows or Xbox but not Linux or macOS. Microsoft doesn’t need the Xbox in the way that Sony needs the Playstation. By taking this approach Microsoft is mitigating their risk. It lets them have multiple revenue streams on products allowing them to take chances on new things and smaller developers. If it doens’t work out at least theres a greater chance of return from more than one storefront. And what about backwards compatibility? All a developer has to do is modify the original game to work in the emulation software installed on every Xbox. This way every game is potentially backwards compatible and honestly it’s hard to think of one that isn’t from the Xbox 360 till now. Only original Xbox stuff is questionable.

At what point does this strategy run out on Sony? As long as the games and hardware stay competitive is my guess. It was when Nintendo’s hardware was no longer competitive that they fell behind Sony and Microsoft. It’s not to say that what they do is bad. They still sell millions of copies of games and the Switch is a huge success. Its just not a traditional under the TV console. Nintendo also got their backwards compatibility kinda right. The original Wii would play Gamecube games and the Wii U played Wii games but didn’t carry Gamecube compatibility forward. The virtualization that started on the Wii was carried to the Wii U and sorta continues on the Switch. Nintendo gets this. Microsoft gets this. Sony… not so much. It’s like they treat digital sales as if they’re just another type of media, like a disc or a cartridge, and thus, trying to keep it locked down to specific consoles, instead of the software it is. It’s like Sony is still trying to get you to buy CDs and MP3s when everyone else has made the move to Spotify. Eventually the “key studios” well is going to run dry. It’s literally impossible to produce a mega hit every time, even with experienced studios and massive funding. Eventually customers get sick of buying the same games over and over again. It’s like albums: after a while it doesn’t matter how much better it looks if it’s the exact same game every generation. At the very least Sony needs to let its smaller teams try new ideas. Nostalgia and exclusives are only going to carry a console so far.

> ▋