this post was submitted on 06 May 2024
1473 points (98.9% liked)

Games

32467 readers
1246 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ech@lemm.ee 145 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Reviews aren't pointless, but their impact only goes so far. I am assuming the massive amount of refunds had more to do with it, tbh.

[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 109 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I suspect someone in accounting ran the numbers and decided they stand to lose more to reduced microtransaction sales than they would have gained via selling scraped data.

Though I agreed with you. It's still a win, but we have to be careful not to conflate this with Sony "caring".

[–] BruceTwarzen@kbin.social 30 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I still think the biggest reason why they wanted to push their shitty platform is to artificially push player numbers. "Look how many people use our scam network, see?"
Now the hilarious part is that hopefully someone has to explain why people go these lengths, just to not join their shitty service.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It was not “someone in accounting”

This shit goes all the way to the top. Every manager in the chain will have their take and influence on the numbers.

[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 9 points 6 months ago

Sure, and I'm not suggesting said bean counter was responsible for the decision. What I am suggesting is that the only thing that influenced the decision was bottom line finances. Someone ran the numbers, and when the suits discovered that they stand to lose more money than they'd gain, they reversed the decision. Never mistake this as Sony "listening" to anything more than their investors and their bottom line.

[–] BruceTwarzen@kbin.social 13 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's probably a bit of this and a bit of that. I mean the game went from one of the best revied games to one of the worst in a day. There were refunds and a drop in players all at the same time.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago

My prediction is that the game will rebound, certainly, but will not reach back to the levels it had before. A percentage of people who refunded won't be buying again and another section probably will quit the game altogether, now or as soon as something newer and shinier shows up. Lots will forget to change their review.

Sony actively hurt their own game and probably made irreparable damage.

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

I'd imagine that there's math to be done on sales for a mixed review game vs. a overwhelming positive one, and its not favorable.