I would buy this on PC in a heartbeat. Too bad Sony doesn’t like profits
post
It's ok, Sony doesn't like PC money anyway so 300k copies must be perfectly fine for them.
Release it on PC and watch it sell more, almost as if releasing it on more platforms allows more people to access it.
Looks like an interesting game. Where is the link to the Steam page, so I can buy and give my money to Sony, so Sony becomes more rich?
Geez after the debacle with their new DRM shit for digital purchases and rolling back their pledge to release to PC, I wonder fucking why people aren't climbing over themselves to throw money at 'em.
Not to mention general economics issues plaguing the world right now. Can't imagine many people have the disposable income to throw at video games to begin with.
Hold on... Okay, so what you're saying is... Locking games behind one platform, especially a dying one, leads to significantly fewer copies sold? I'm speechless. How is that even possible? If only we could figure out a way to foresee such events...
Is this some Hollywood accounting, where they set the game up to fail? I’ve literally never heard of it until this post.
I'm not sure we can help you if you've never heard of this game. It's been in every major gaming news site's release calendar, reviewed very well, and it's been in several of Sony's showcases.
EDIT: Folks, I don't care if you also personally never heard of it. That wasn't the point. This game had a marketing budget and was not set up to fail.
I mean it's the first I've heard of it too :o
What sites do you follow for gaming news? OpenCritic aggregated 129 different outlets that reviewed it, and it's a front page sort of deal for any of them.
I just go to YouTube, Lemmy, BSky, maybe a few others. I don’t go directly to any major gaming news sites, since they’ve had declining track records for decades.
And of course, Steam. Criticize the monoculture if you like, but when Sony and MS have killed their community features in favor of EpsteinNet, it’s not surprising people will go to platforms designed to discuss games.
Your media sources aren't really indictive of monoculture. More the opposite and that's the problem for marketers. It's hard as shit to reach people because everyone can form their own niche media community. If people still treated IGN and like award shows as their mainstream trustworthy source, we'd still be in the pre-youtube monoculture
I mean I've even heard of the specrcular failure that is Highguard but not Saros. The internet is definitely much more fragmented even within gaming niche.
I mean I only know about it because I saw a couple ads on Instagram, then I watched the sponsored (by Sony/Saros devs mind you) Iron Pineapple video.
It looks cool visually and seems like it'd be fun once you get into the flow of the game, but it's PlayStation exclusive and I'm not really a bullet hell person.
Edit response time: That people interested in games did not know about it would be very indicative of a major failing and current lack of relavance of mainstream gaming media. That would seem to be very much on point, as there is no need to help us for not knowing, but it would seem Sony might need help.
The fact that I never seen or heard of this is no surprise though, the only time gaming news coverage shows up for most is when there is some sort of scandal. Its why I know more about "Mix Tape", "High Guard" and "Marathon" then this game.
I like my small indie / oddball games but I find I get more info from people steaming a game and talking about it then a "review" that had clearly been bought and paid for. And it seems I am not the only one, as clearly no one is reading the "major" gaming news sites anymore. Well at least in this case no one from their target audience is.
They definitely did a lot of sponsored YouTube content. Iron Pineapple did a sponsored video. Seemed mid, not a $700 (ps5 + game) game.
I would be all over this if it were available on a platform I actually owned. But I'm not about to pay $1k to play it (or whatever it costs after Sony's latest round of price hikes on aging hardware).
A £70 roguelike is a big fucking ask.
The only one I've played, completed and enjoyed was Hades. It doesn't waste your time even on a failed run. A run is like 40 minutes of real time. That's about where this shit needs to be to attract non-masochists. Even then, £70.
If only we could see the reason why... jesus is everyone in modern gaming business turning into morons?
I will definitely play this at some point. Returnal is up there in my like, top 5 games of the past few years. I will happily wait for sale.
Be warned, it is a much shallower game than Returnal was. It is a better 3D bullet hell. More bullets in denser patterns and more bullet types. Everything else about the game is worse and not by a little.
There is no more cheap-ass hardware, so they don't even have that going for them.
Noone wants to make exclusive games these days since it cuts ~66% of the profit.
Nintendo will be fine so long as they maintain control over their intellectual property and stay focused on the handheld market. Nintendo Switch (1 and 2) has sold nearly 200 million units. Steam deck, their closest competition, is closer to 10 million. Obviously the Switch has been around for nearly a decade. But handheld consoles are here to stay. Plus Nintendo is vicious when it comes to maintaining control of their properties... Which are beloved. Pokemon, Mario, Zelda.... As long as it keeps those locked down and stays ahead of the handheld competition, they will be fine.
I'm curious about it, but I'm not sure rogue-like bullet hell games are my jam.
I fucking loved this game, it's a shame it didn't sell better. The performance was bad in some places on my pleb PS5, but mostly fine. It would go from fine to absolute shit, only for it to go back to fine when I went further into the level. So I think it was just bugged, I hope they can fix it.
Returnal for me was the better game tho, I liked the level design better in that one and the guns felt better. Saros was still very very good.



top 50 comments