It’s not that I don’t really want to do it at all, I really can’t do it, or it’s relatively unnecessary: It’s impossible to do it early Working on the PC platform, the PC terminal really didn't make much money at that time. In the mid-term, I didn’t have that energy. From entering the game to fight with Nintendo and Sega, to later with Microsoft and Nintendo, they sold the building after the game. There was no extra effort to engage in the PC platform. Later, the PC was launched, but for a long time, the Steam family became the dominant player. The difficulty of intervention increased the long-established interest chain, which caused players and fans to be unwilling to have a certain division between the PC and the console game industry due to the historical perspective of the development. As a result, supporting the PC model will affect the mainframe business and reduce the current total profit.
As for the subject of the question, the last two points are actually the most critical two points.
In fact, I understand what the subject of the question really means, and many respondents answered that whether the hosting business makes money or not is wrong, and even simply misunderstood the questioner’s question. The secretary answered the question of piracy and other answers said it was because the host users were better...
For example, the issue of piracy is only a better understanding for the Chinese people, but this problem is not universal. . Because first of all, the gaming industry focuses on regions such as Europe, America, and Japan, so when it comes to the mainframe industry, the basic common sense is that you can't just take the Chinese environment to cover it. Moreover, in the first few years of the development of the mainframe industry, let alone piracy, the PC did not develop much. And who said that the host is not pirated, but it is much better than the PC.
The most important thing is that the existence of STEAM proves that even if piracy is a big blow to sales, it does not mean that PC games are not profitable. The real question of the questioner is why Sony did not take into account the PS and then vigorously attack the PC.
The other answers to this question cannot be said to be okay, but none of them touched the core of the problem.
Otherwise, how to explain steam? If Sony really doesn't plan to engage in PC due to issues such as piracy, why did he put an exclusive game on steam to test the water? And steam won't make money anymore? Give the business of Steam to Sony, will Sony not want it?
I guess the subject of the question knows that the entire host business (including hardware and software) is profitable, and the question mainly refers to The hardware does not make money.
The subject of the question is that there is a problem with the description in the question. What he really means should be——
Since the hardware profit margin of the game console itself is low, even at a loss, the development of PC This problem does not exist on the end (everyone buys computer hardware by themselves, and Sony does not have to sell hardware at a loss), and from the perspective of expanding the business chain, it is entirely possible to develop the business and sell games on the PC. In this way, you can make money for games without having to sell hardware at a loss, and you can make more money when your business expands.
(And the "exclusive" mentioned by the questioner should not refer to a purely exclusive game, but an exclusive platform, so he mentioned moving PSN to PC)Problem description
In fact, this idea is okay roughly (although the details are indeed naive) .
Expanding business, any company wants to do this kind of thing.
On the other hand, did Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and other major console manufacturers really never consider that they also dominate the PC platform at the same time and make all the money together? Would they not want it if all the steam business was attributed to Sony and Microsoft?
In other industries, Taobao and JD.com, who are e-commerce platforms, don't want to use physical platforms together? Haven't you considered making a computer when you are a mobile phone? Like Huawei, isn't it also a point for all electronic products to dabble in now?
But for a company, its capabilities are always limited. So for it, the most important thing is to use limited resources to maximize it as much as possible.
For example, everyone knows that mobile games make money, and some people ask why many big game companies don’t make mobile games? Many people analyze from various angles that big companies don't want to make mobile games, but this is actually crooked. It's not that they don't want to do it, it's impossible or relatively unnecessary. If they can really make a lot of money in mobile games, more than a single player, why not do it?
I have done mobile games like Nintendo, but they are not as profitable as their other IPs and their platforms, so the focus is not there. Or, like SE, although it has been complained about as a "mobile game manufacturer", it also knows that the core pillars that support itself are the FF series. Once the old IP of FF falls, it will not make so much money from mobile games. That can only support one's own pillar obediently.
Come back and say, Sony Dafa doesn't talk about the PC side. What kind of electronic equipment hasn't he been involved in? Just think back to the mobile phone craze that year, how many mobile phone manufacturers have sprung up like mushrooms, Sony also thought about making mobile phones, so now everyone knows what Dafa mobile phones look like.
So Sony didn’t want to make money on PC in the past, such as PS NOW, which proves that it not only wants to do PC side, but it also wants to do cloud games.
Then PS NOW is in this state, is there any way...
So It’s not that Sony never thought of doing it. The key thing is not that you can do it if you want to. What's more, under the current situation, not only is there a giant that has not been able to get the money from EPIC for so long, there is a certain split between the PC side and the host side, and rushing to focus on the PC side may affect the income of the host side. , But picked up sesame seeds and lost watermelon.
Then we need to specifically answer why this is the case. This will be a relatively long explanation. Because I have always believed that many things cannot be viewed in isolation. If you want to view them horizontally and vertically, this will involve the entire history of the game's development.
In summary, it is the five points I described at the beginning.
Based on those five points, I will explain in detail why Sony did not vigorously develop the PC-side business:
First, it is impossible to develop the PC side in the early days, because the PC side game business was not so profitable compared to the host computer
In the early days of the development of video games, the performance of PCs in games was not as good as that of game consoles. To be precise, In the beginning, it was basically an "arcade>host>computer" state (of course, it's basically the reverse now).
Think about it this way, the popular system of WINDOWS XP seems to have been used for a long time and is quite old. In fact, this system was officially released in 2001, at that time Sony has already released PS2. The revolutionary IPHONE4 was actually released in 2010. At that time, a USB flash drive was only a few GB and sold for hundreds of dollars, but at that time PS3 started to enter the final stage, because PS4 was released in 2013.
So In fact, the development has been too fast in the past ten years. Many things that we think are very old and backward, in fact, have not been far apart for too long.
And if it is only more than 20 years before the millennium, it would be a luxury to have a computer in China. At least when I was a kid, before 2000, few people around me could own a PC by themselves. The information I found was "In April 1994, the Zhongguancun area education and scientific research demonstration network project entered the Internet and realized the TCP/IP connection with the Internet, thus opening the full-featured Internet service. Since then, China has been officially recognized as having the Internet. Country."
PS1 happened to be on sale in 1994, the 1994 PC-related information I found on the Internet is:
Of course, the country was relatively backward at the time, but most other countries would not be much better.
If we go forward to the era of FC and even Atari, then PCs will have no relationship with games. Computers use tapes to play games. ……The CPC64
released in 1984 seems to be okay, but thisA computer is already at an approachable price (£199/299) among PCs at the time. Other computers will only be more expensive, which is not the price of additional gaming equipment. And despite the low cost of tapes, you can refer to Director Ao’s video to understand how painful it is to play games on tapes (it takes a long time to read the tapes, and then you can start the game after reading it).
Compared with the price of FC at the time, it is...
Although the cost of cassettes is more expensive than tapes, the low price of the console itself and the good gaming experience, the PC has no market to compete with the console from the beginning of the game field .
The reason is the weak performance of early electronic equipment, making the machine unable to do comprehensive work like it is now, and can only focus on one aspect. PC is mainly used in commercial work, making it difficult to compare game performance with game consoles, or requires too high a threshold, and most people will not use computers for games (in fact, this impact is decreasing until now, but Still exists).
And the biggest platform party on PC-steam was founded in 2002. But the early scale was also very small, and its growth node is estimated to be in the era of "The Elder Scrolls 5" in 2011, and the GTA5 landing on steam in 2015 will once again grow its momentum (in China, it is probably also during the GTA5 period that the reputation of steam has really expanded to the circle. Besides, after all, before this, most people were still three big moms). PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds: Battle Royale has been clamored by the slot, and it cannot be denied that he has also made a great contribution to the substantial expansion of STEAM users.
Therefore, it is only a matter of less than ten years that Steam's momentum has reached a certain level of influence, and it hasn't been long.
And Even now, the bulk of game sales is still on the console side, and the rapid growth of the PC side is in recent years. In other words, the proportion of PC-side games will only be smaller before.
So for the early Sony, it was impossible to focus on the PC.
Second, there is no spare capacity to expand the PC platform in the mid-term
Although "Sony bankruptcy" and "selling the building" are playing It’s difficult, but it’s true that Sony fell into a financial crisis a few years ago.
At that time, Sony was deeply in the quagmire of losses. There are many opinions about the reasons-some said that the business was too big and greedy and could not chew, some said that Japanese corporate system problems caused the tail to be big, and some said that the performance of PS3 was poor (early pricing). Too high, wrong positioning leads to performance really not good).
However, this is not only a problem faced by Sony's game business, but also a problem faced by the entire Sony enterprise.
In 2012, Kazuo Hirai (also known as the "uncle" of the players) became the CEO, turning the tide to make Sony better. Games, finance, and music became the three pillars of Sony's profits.
This is a game with an average score of 88 for MC and 9.6 for IGN.
And the quality of the first version of this game is indeed good (let’s not talk about the numerical issues of subsequent updates), as an exclusive, in fact, it was originally blown together with the original mine line after it was released. To become "Black Blood" together, there is no need to mention what word-of-mouth games are Black Soul and Blood Source (although there are reasons why these three game styles are similar).
As a result, it was just such a game. The price was originally stable at three or four hundred yuan. The price plunged overnight and dropped all the way to more than one hundred, which can be called a bear market. In the final analysis, the word-of-mouth crisis is- announced to log on to steam about half a year after the release.
Coincidentally, at the end of PS4, "Horizon: Dawn" announced its login to Steam, which triggered another wave of public opinion.
From these phenomena, it can be found that actually hindering Sony is not only the problem of other competitors and its own strength, but its users are also opposed to this behavior.
Although I always urge everyone to treat a manufacturer rationally, don’t stand in line just because you have purchased a platform. But one problem I have to admit is- Most of the console users are just light players and follow-up players, and they cannot expect too much from them. And this kind of psychology and behavior, in fact, is indeed in line with the mood of ordinary people.
Because many users who purchase consoles, in fact, they do not necessarily love games. They mightI just thought it was cool, everyone around me bought it, and I bought the console when I wanted to give it a try.
For this part of users, their attitude towards the so-called exclusive, whether it is an exclusive game or an exclusive system, is likely to be just-"I bought your host with money, so no matter what other people can do Free to enjoy what I could only enjoy?"
It may even be pure "superiority".
This kind of mentality cannot be said to be right or wrong, but it exists objectively.
So for Sony, the game industry is one of Sony’s pillar industries without saying "customers are God". What does it mean to provoke customers who want to make money?
Then someone may mention Microsoft at this time.
It is true that Microsoft has also landed XGPU on PCs, and started to land on other platforms exclusively. But I have analyzed before, Microsoft has several conditions that Sony does not have:Microsoft has fallen into a huge disadvantage since the late XBOX360, and the number of fans and stickiness is insufficient, so its users are not The General Assembly to address these issues. Microsoft's own pillar industry is the system software that almost monopolizes the PC business, and logging in to WIN10 does not appear abrupt. Many exclusives actually only log in to WIN10, and have not yet logged in to other platforms such as steam, such as XGPU and "Horizon 4" pillars. Through the above conditions, we will move forward steadily and slowly. The main thing to log in to steam is to use small works and transplant old works, which are subtle.
The first condition alone limits Sony.
Because of Sony's long-term advantage, fans have actually formed a psychology- They are not willing to change Sony at will, especially changes that will harm their own interests.
This is similar to the mentality that Microsoft users have when they face all kinds of Microsoft behaviors, "It's up to you, if you continue this way, whether you can continue to export the mainframe in the future is a problem, just don't mess around" mentality. It's completely different.
As for the remaining WIN10 and other issues, there is no way for this...
So even if it’s the same thing, such as PSN logging on to the PC, Sony might expect the user’s reaction to be-"Wow, so the game I bought can be played on the computer, so considerate service!" In fact, some users may think. Yes—"**, I bought your game console to play on your game console. Didn’t I buy it for nothing when you’re on the PC?"
This kind of disagreement is only in the hosting business Only Sony, which has consolidated its strong position, has become a major obstacle to logging in to the PC.
Fifth, due to the historical perspective of the development so far, the PC and console game industry have a certain division, leading to the support of the PC model will affect the console business and reduce the current total profit.
This is why I say the subject is naive.
In fact, as I mentioned in the previous point, some of Sony’s behaviors anticipated user reactions and the actual reactions of users will differ greatly.
And The subject's idea is very good, but there will be a huge discrepancy with the actual situation.
His original idea may be- PS4 will still be sold, and PSN will be able to attract PC users after logging in to the PC, so that the total income will increase.
But the actual situation will be- After logging in to the PC, it will affect the sales of PS4.
There are many reasons for this phenomenon, including the user problem mentioned in my fourth point. If Sony logs on to the PC platform at will, it may irritate some users, which is not worth the gain.
In addition, there are other reasons such as:The lack of exclusiveness will directly affect the competitiveness of PS series consoles. PC users are not sticky enough and are likely to engage in dual PC platforms. There are also PC exclusive games. Let’s not mention whether there can be more games than steam games. What if it evolves into PSN PC version games than PS4? Insufficient platform control. Due to the long-term differentiation between the PC and the host, its users are also faintly divided into two groups
Among these reasons, Some are mentioned before, and there are some new ones we mention.
Such as the monopoly problem.
Although I have always said that the success of a host is closely related to the four major aspects of "games, price, innovation, and performance", Cannot be considered in isolation. It cannot be said that I think that if the monopoly is strong, it must win, and if the price is high, it must lose. But it does not mean that "game" is not an important factor, but that all four are important.
"Exclusive game", as a key part of the "game", also has a great influence on the success of a host.
Logging the "exclusive game" into the PC is like breaking an arm to the host itself. It cannot be said that a console cannot be sold without an exclusive game, but it will definitely have a great impact. Especially in the mainframe business, the PC business has a giant steam guarding it. It is a very stupid act to abandon your own combat power.
Don’t log in to the PC when the exclusive game is on, and you haven’t waited until you are finished with steam. My home base was first approved by Microsoft and Nintendo. Isn’t it worth the loss?
As for the "platform control" issue.
We must first understand that the core profit point of a host is currently "game sharing."
Why Nintendo game is not out of the PC version?
on this stuff There are not a few games, everyone can't wait for you to stop the closed game, why not let me download a steam to play.
Another example is the National Bank host, X1\PS4\NS National Bank, which is closer to life. If there is no back door, this closed system will basically not be sold under the condition of locked clothes and locked areas. of.
After pulling away, go back to the PC.
So for the PC, it is impossible to engage in closed mode at present. Then the PC is not like the host, the host can guarantee to use only its own platform, but the PC cannot. In other words, in terms of "platform control", the PC is not guaranteed.
Don’t look at the steam booming now, in case steam is out of steam some day, or other platforms become stronger, users will directly switch to other platforms. On the other hand, if the host computer has a closed physical machine, it is difficult for users to lose.
That is to say, even if Sony can compete with steam to control part of the PC, the result may be -
EPIC appears again A strong challenger, it is easy to be divided up with a little carelessness. When Sony entered the PC terminal, the rear was empty, and it was bought by Microsoft and Nintendo, and most of the mainframe business that should have been lost.
This situation of attacking other areas without a stable foundation makes it very likely that the two sides will not be thankful. After all, other manufacturers are not vegetarian.
In addition, due to the long-term differentiation between the PC and the host (according to the game I mentioned earlier Development history), leading to its users also faintly divided into two groups.
Although all-platform parties also exist, the opposition between most PC parties and host parties also exists objectively, which is the so-called game contempt chain.
In this case, some hosting parties are also reluctant to see PSN dabble in PC, because it may affect their "superiority."
These factors all lead to a result--
If Sony does not have enough If you have an advantage (which can directly compete with steam in a short time), if you enter the market rashly, the result may directly affect your host business. As the mainframe business is currently the foundation and pillar of Sony, if it is damaged, it may cause endless disasters.
In summary, we can draw such a conclusion——
In the early days, the PC game business was low , Sony and other big players will not pay attention.
In the mid-term, Sony competed with other big players, and its own internal problems, there was no time to take care of the PC side.
In the later period, the PC side developed rapidly, but it was still not as good as the host industry, and steam was the dominant one, so it was difficult to start easily. And foreign enemies have not been eradicated.
In the long period of differentiation between the PC and the host, as well as the monopoly and strength of Sony's host business, its users and audiences have also hinderedSony's development on the PC side. And when it already controls a larger share of the host business than the PC business, Sony does not dare to take risks at will.
The combination of various factors has led to Sony's current small attempts to get involved in the PC business, but they all ended in failure and are unwilling to increase their efforts.
(I don’t think many people read it, plus the messy writing caused by too sleepy, and I will modify it later when I have time)