Slashdot Mirror
Sony Could Face Developer Exodus On PSN
donniebaseball23 writes "As the PlayStation Network outage continues, developers are feeling the economic pinch. There's been no word from Sony on whether they'll compensate companies who produce games for PSN, but Capcom has already said it's losing potentially 'millions' from the downtime. Worse yet, developers who rely on PSN revenues may jump ship if they aren't compensated, warns Dylan Cuthbert, creator of popular PSN game PixelJunk. 'I have a feeling they [Sony] are thinking about doing something or they will lose developers, which of course is pretty bad for them,' he said."
While a major shift away from the PS3 is unlikely — downtime or not, developers don't want to lock themselves out of such a big piece of the market — it does have undeniable negative effects on some companies. For example, Bethesda's FPS Brink, which focuses heavily on multiplayer, launched without that capability for PS3 users. You can bet Microsoft will use this outage as a selling point for exclusivity or Xbox-first arrangements.
I have just sold my POS PS3 at a bargain basement price, and I will never be buying another piece of hardware or software from them ever again. PSN fiasco isn't the only reason to hate Sony, just another in a long line.
Good riddance
I remember the good ol' days when having internet access made a game more fun, rather than it being a necessity just to play at all. Maybe this kind of thing will 'encourage' a return to that way of planning, if only a little.
Hopefully events like the PSN outage will give companies pause in their rush to move everything online. Only a few weeks ago DragonAge players found themselves unable to play their single player game as it required an online login and the servers were down. Hopefully it will force companies to come up with better solutions, sadly it will probably just force them to alter their EULAs to avoid any and all liability.
Or a completely new console.
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
Yes, I think this is broadly right. Personally, I probably won't stop buying from the PSN altogether, but I certainly will move to using pre-paid points cards rather than letting them have the details of my (new, just replaced - thanks Sony) credit card. That adds a potential layer of inconvenience to purchases which will certainly make me less inclined towards impulse buys.
Plus, as an owner of both a PS3 and a 360, it's yet another reason to favour the latte when making decisions on which platform to buy multi-platform games for. Unless there were glaring technical differences in the PS3 version's favour (a la FF13), I was already inclined towards the 360 on the basis that I prefer the controller and have more friends who also own 360s than PS3s (and hence a larger Xbox Live friends list). After seeing the PSN's dire resilience demonstrated, these decisions are going to become pretty much no-brainers in future. So I'm only likely to buy single-platform exclusives for the PS3 from now on.
Meanwhile, developers inclined towards giving Sony those exclusives are going to be thinking their decisions through very carefully. After all, the PSN has been painful to a lot of game developers - not just those who have seen PSN launches postponed or games launch with multiplayer not functioning, but also those who have DLC as part of their business model (which, like it or not, is most of them these days). Bioware haven't been shifting any Dragon Age or Mass Effect 2 DLC on the PS3 since the PSN went down. Gust haven't been selling any Ar Tonelico Qoga DLC. Black Ops: Escalation? Forget it. Now in some cases, customers will just postpone their purchases until the PSN store comes back up (which is likely to be the final component to do so), but in other cases, they'll have "moved on" from the game in question and the sale will be lost forever.
There's been a lot of hyperbole about the impacts of the PSN outage and data leak. I find it very hard to imagine large numbers of people rushing to trade in their PS3s. In fact, largely due to a lack of new releases that have interested me since Portal 2, I've spent the last few weeks using my PS3 way more than I normally would as I work through my backlog of games I've been meaning to finish. I played Killzone 3's campaign through (and was very impressed by how well the PS Move controls work). I sank 40 hours into Ar Tonelico Qoga (one of the few Japanese RPGs of this console generation to be actually good). And I finally got around to finishing the first Uncharted game. The PS3 has a large installed base now and, after a slow start, a decent library of games. In the immediate future, it isn't going anywhere.
The damage for Sony will, I suspect, be more subtle and long-term. There will be changes to how customers spend their money in the PSN store that could prove painful over time. And there will be damage to Sony's commercial relationships with the wider industry that could take years to repair. Compare how Nintendo managed to annoy a huge chunk of the industry (including, critically, Squaresoft) through sheer arrogance during the transition from the SNES to the N64, with the result that despite the SNES's dominance, the N64 and Gamecube died a slow death due to lack of third party developer interest (a problem which still afflicts the Wii to some extent). Sony are running a high risk of finding themselves in a similar situation now - you mess with your partners' bottom lines at your peril.
Why not just make the games single player stand alone and ADD the networking stuff on as another mode. That way, the games don't require PSN for people to play them. Or use your own 3rd party server which would probably be even worse.
In most competitive games there is no bank of dedicated servers -- one of the player's machines is the "server". Why not simply allow unranked matches between peers?
For example, "Unranked Matches > Custom Match > Join Server > Enter the IP of the game server to join."
Thus, when PSN or XBL is unavailable (which has happened for maintenance, it did piss me off) the players will still be able to play. In PSN's case, since it's already free, WHY NOT? It's not like they'll be losing money by doing so.
The secret joke of the "online" is that it's just a DRM mechanism designed to keep people from playing games -- Eg: I can't play Halo2 online in a custom match, even though all of my friends have started the game, and our XBoxes are talking to eachother (party chat) and all of our consoles know that the others' have loaded the game -- we can verify this by looking at the Halo2 icon next to our names on the friends list...
So, then we fire up OpenVPN and join a system link game over the Internet, and we're all playing Halo2 online -- XBL was not even needed for this -- We're just using it to coordinate our play-times and for the voice chat feature.
If you've ever seen "Selecting New Host" or other similar message, you'll realize that the XBL and PNS is actually just made up of the machines everyone purchased (Host == Server). Only a small number of "matchmaking" and/or media / score tracking & DRM servers exist in comparison to control how the masses play their games. In the case of Halo2 (and all original Xbox games) they've artificially obsoleted the games' Internet play features -- They want you to play the new games, not enjoy the older games.
Personally, I won't buy a game that doesn't support system link (LAN play) -- VPN stands for Virtual Player Network to me.
They think this was all about stealing credit cards. A heist that large though plummets in value as it is too well known and the cards too readily canceled. I would imagine the market value for the stolen cards to be far less than a typical heist that doesn't become publicly known.
I really think this about punishing Sony for doing evil things. Whether you want to pick their DRM infatuation, pursuite of GeoHot, removal of other OS and any number of other things doesn't matter. Somebody was trying to send a message to Sony that in the real world a court room victory bought with the best lawyers you can find can still have a very real cost.
Estimates that put the cost of this in the billion dollar range have been making the news lately. Sony, you just need to ask yourself, was it worth a billion dollars, the loss of public goodwill and a number of pissed of developers? Whether or not Sony will stop playing hardball and start being the corporate bully is doubtful. In the end whoever did this will likely end up in prison, the only question is what lesson did Sony learn from this?
Actually, TF2 works just fine on LAN play without a net connection. You may have problems with the ONLINE multiplayer, but the game will still work on a LAN. Hell, if Valve does eventually shut down everything related to the game, you should still be able to play online, albeit with online default weapons.
My sig can beat up your sig.
Why not just make the games single player stand alone and ADD the networking stuff on as another mode. That way, the games don't require PSN for people to play them. Or use your own 3rd party server which would probably be even worse.
You mean like PC games have been doing since the 90's?
How novel.
MS/Sony dont want to do that because they miss out on all the revenue of being the only online service available. "But PSN was free" I hear you ask, well it was free for you but not for the developers who have to pay licensing fees for it which came out of the RRP of the game you bought so I guess it wasn't so free (and all that personal information they get from it too).
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
They could face developer exodus ... but it probably won't happen. ... but it probably won't happen.
They could face customer exodus
My bet is that a year from now, this issue will have be a distant memory for the vast majority of people and PSN will be ticking along as normal.
I'm sure there are plenty of people who would like to see these issues cause Sony to crash and burn - but past history (with things like the rootkit) has shown that it is unlikely to happen.
Sorry, but just being realistic.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
Multiplayer *is* new. Or at least the idea of making a game that only plays online is. It is perfectly reasonable to make a game that is designed to be played online. Think of how boring WoW or Eve Online (I'm not a big console player) would be in single player mode
Considering that Eve Online is just a 3D realtime Trade Wars 2002 (which is a game from 1984, not 2002), and considering the countless other MUDs, online-only games aren't that new of an idea.