I daresay that already exists even... and it's friendslop.

A group of kid devs who wants to make something dumb to play with their friends are just as likely to create the next big thing as any AAA studio, right now. They can just fire up unity, unreal or godot and start placing assets and scripting, and maybe they'll find something that resonates with a lot of people looking for semi-collaborative experiences

most obvious example: https://store.steampowered.com...

They can hardly blame Denuvo for Concorde and Marathon failing.

Also "PC gamers are the reason that Concorde and Marathon failed, even though they also failed on Playstation. If they were exclusive to Playstation they would have succeeded" is uh... an unproven premise. Speculative.

Execs are certainly not immune to cope to prevent themselves having to take responsibility for poor decision making.

Mostly agree.

I think if they'd been paying attention instead of dictating to themselves what consumers wanted in pursuit of that big return... they would have noticed that hero shooters were bleeding audience the whole time, and extraction shooters were largely populated by those who had decided that relentless PvP was the kind of gameplay they wanted... It's hard to say how much of the market that group is, but it's certainly an exclusionary subset.

All their market analysis seems to rely on really reductive assumptions about consumer choices and preferences... and there are some places that they basically can't follow to, essentially for business reasons. It's very hard for, for example, Sony to produce a quick turnaround, low budget friendslop game for a variety of reasons. Helldivers is the closest they've gotten. They're just not set up to be lean like a solo developer who is just playing around in unity or unreal in the hours they're not working a day job can be, and it's real hard for their devs to have the same emotional commitment to a project like that a solo dev who owns the whole thing can.

Sony have used the phrase "Playstation Exclusive" (note the capital E that you also used) for decades. There has been a window over the last 4 years or so where titles that would have previously been released only on a Sony console were also ported to PC.

Initially during this period they used the term "Console Exclusive" to denote the game's lack of availability on rival consoles (mostly just the Xbox line). They pretty quickly dropped this because, in their minds, consumers think of PCs and consoles as different kinds of devices.

I hope that helps you make sense of why they think they're justified in using the term that way.

more than two. they also had similar things happen in the JPO apparently. Or something like that.

Yeah and... The titles they didn't promote well enough sometimes did much better than expected (e.g Tsushima).

Instead of taking this into account and putting more effort into single player games that were actually making them more money than they expected, they chased the fleeting extractor shooter market (which anyone could tell them is severely limited because its player base have to be cool with the risk of losing everything every time they play... that's a pretty acquired taste eh) on the premise that they might catch the next fortnite.

It really seems like the folks making the decisions here don't understand the environment but assume it should conform to them rather than the other way around.

There were two separate things there. Yeah they lost that court battle, but around the same time the USPTO granted them some kind of patent for RPGs where you build the party as you go.
The USPTO then revoked that patent a few months ago, because it should never have been issued in the first place.

Are you complaining about the long established indulgent practice by game console companies where they call something 'exclusive' when they mean 'there is a limited window time where it's on our console but nowhere else'?

You're probably like 20 years too late to get mad about this.

This sure does look at bit like someone in the global sony exec not understanding that Bungie's failure with Marathon was as much their fault as Bungie's and blaming the whole thing on PC gaming as a whole.

That and believing that they don't need to compete with the xbox any more.

Lets see how that goes for them, I guess.

There were also two Megami Tensei games and the first Shin Megami Tensei released by the time Pokemon Red and Green were released in Japan in 1994.

They never should have had a patent on that, and they shouldn't be allowed to add 'with a stylus' to the end of it and suddenly patent something they couldn't before... just like they shouldn't be able to add 'on the internet'.

Can you explain where this exuberant confidence comes from?

My back of the napkin math that tries to make the current wave of LLM based businesses profitable always fails... This isn't true of all systems people refer to as AI, but so far every solution for OpenAI, Anthropic (and probably Microsoft too, maybe not Google, hard to say) seems to involve them putting their prices up at least 10 times (and possibly up to 50 times for OpenAI).

If you have a solution that isn't just a tautology about token prices, please feel free to explain it.

valid and amusing concern.

and yet I'm not sure that it will matter too much to the people desperately trying to prevent the outputs getting in their training data... or the people who don't know why they'd need to. For different reasons, obviously.

Pretty sure their message translates to "it doesn't support the glorified narratives I was taught in school".

I'm not even hating on them for it, it's so common that they just don't know that high school history is simplified to the point of making it seem like the famous people did all the work.

Pretty sure the GP is referencing Conservapedia, specifically. So yes... it would still be a massive duplication of effort.