Neither Returnal nor Ratchet made massive sales on PS5 either. I doubt Returnal even cracked a million. The Last of Us Part 1 was a utter disaster of a launch on PC so no wonder it sold terribly. The mainline AAA games like Horizon or God of War have sold like 3-4million copies on Steam alone, which is not bad for several years old port jobs. Porting a game that didn't exactly set sales charts on fire to PC is not going to make it sell better compared to console.
It doesn't matter if Returnal & Rift Apart didn't set the charts on fire on PS5. Keep in mind the PS5 install base was a lot smaller in 2021 than it is today. But Steam supposedly has an install base of over 130 million, and was about that size even in 2021, let alone 2022 or 2023. You mean to tell me the dozens of millions more Steam users on PC didn't magically result in a proportional increase of the sales? But I thought that install base number had merit...oh yeah, you don't have to pay for a Steam account. That makes it a lot easier to reach 130+ million users.
Anyway, Returnal & Rift Apart did fine on PS5 given install base size, the fact the former is a brand new IP and the latter a known but not-as-big 1P IP (compared to GOW, TLOU, Uncharted, Spiderman etc.). They are still moving increments of units day in and day out as well, so it's not like they've 100% stopped selling just because new games are available. Horizon & GOW did the best out of Sony's PC ports but definitely not in terms of total revenue; many of those 3-4 million were sold at steep sales prices and discounts.
However that just seems to be the nature of a lot of PC gamers: willing to spend big on hardware, but pocket change on software. It's part of the reason I feel any strategy with SIE in porting current-gen releases to PC that are non-GaaS is ultimately value-destructive to the console side of things, at least for this generation (and all or most of next generation, I'd say).
Starfield is doing just fine on PC as well, estimates put it at around 3 million on Steam alone, so considering it is on Gamepass that is fine (although it pales in comparison to Elden Ring, Hogwarts, or BG3). Redfall is dogshit so no surprise there, and Pentiment and Hifi Rush are AA games that are available on Gamepass. Odd you didn't mention Forza Horizon 5 which is somewhere around 5-6 million copies sold on Steam.
Are those pre-or-post refunds for Starfield? And it seems the game went on sale rather quickly even on Steam, so just because a copy sold doesn't mean it was necessarily good revenue off that copy.
And where are you getting the FH5 numbers? How much was the average MSRP per copy sold? I'd think a game moving 6 million on Steam, maybe 1 million on Windows Store and another 2-3 million on Xbox consoles would warrant a sales figure update. The more likely truth is it's well under 6 million sold on Steam and probably similar on other platforms & storefronts. After all, it's in Game Pass. And we know what Game Pass does to sales of games going by Microsoft's own data in the FTC hearing.
So a port of an AAA several years old game for Sony can potentially make them around $120 million per release for what is basically peanuts to port it. That basically is enough to fund a whole other game that can be released on PS5 first. Obviously the calculation changes if this PC strategy impacts console revenue and sales, but it has been 3 years and the demand for PS5, PS5 exclusives has never been higher. Sony is currently also seeing record revenue. Sony has furthermore made zero promises to anyone so if the strategy starts to not work out for them they will just stop.
Right, that's several years old, but you're being more figurative in that usage if you think a mere 1-2 years suits "several", whereas for me it would be more literal. If they want to port current-gen non-GaaS titles to PC, and not bottom-out the value proposition of the console, the best way would be as follows: give the games a 4-6 year gap, time the PC port for 1-2 years before a new entry (or new equivalent game) from that studio releases on PS consoles. Add in QOL features and maybe additional content for the PC version that's a sneak peek into the next release from the studio, but provide that content and QOL stuff for console owners who already purchased the game to upgrade to for a small fee, depending on the type of content (so $10, or $20 or $30 for full-on expansions).
1-2 years simply isn't enough breathing room, especially considering crossover between console and PC. And yes this exist, even Jim Ryan has admitted to it by acknowledging the platforms compete for players' time and money. If gaming tastes weren't similar, we wouldn't be seeing so many multiplat ports between both platforms. It'd be a lot closer to what it was back in the '90s, or during most of 6th gen, where the majority of libraries between console and PC was very distinct (and if there were ports, they were many years spaced apart).
Otherwise I think maybe we're in agreement about the general way Sony can approach the strategy. Like you said, if sales & revenue console-side are impacted, they can adjust. However, let's be real here: $120 million revenue off PC sales isn't going to fund a modern AAA game all by itself. Maybe a couple AA games, but Sony's big AAA traditional games are costing up to $200 million a piece now. Considering the revenue they likely make annually from just 1P game sales on PlayStation, you'd expect PC ports to be doing like $120 million - $150 million per quarter, not the entire fiscal year. So PC players need to step it up if the plan is to net more 1P releases from Sony that would come to PC, and come sooner (maybe even Day 1).
But the problem is, how does that side scale up, in a way which won't impact console-side revenue and sales in the short or especially long-term? There isn't actually a solid answer for that yet; Microsoft completely failed to provide a satisfying answer, so who's left? That's why it's a very delicate balance and if I were running SIE, I wouldn't want to emphasize PC too much at all in the risk of shifting core enthusiasts to that platform and away from PlayStation consoles (and everything the console helps boost, like sub service rates, 3P sales, MTX/DLC sales, peripheral sales, even branding deals and marketing rights etc.).
I'm not sure how vague they've been.
Their releases have largely made sense to me. You look at the best-selling PS4 games and Sony's major franchises and they've largely all received PC ports.
Spider-Man - Check
God of War - Check
Uncharted 4 - Check
Horizon Zero Dawn - Check
The Last of Us - Check
The Last of Us 2 is being remastered and will certainly receive a PC port. So maybe the question is why is TLOU2 getting a remaster and Spider-Man, God of War, Uncharted, and Horizon didn't? I think that's because TLOU is simply a franchise Sony is trying to elevate significantly with their transmedia plans. TLOU was the biggest show in the world. They don't have any other franchise that they have control over that is going to deliver results like this. It makes sense to introduce TLOU2 to PC in a state where they can sell it for more money.
They ported Day's Gone when they were testing out the waters.
We've yet to see Ghost of Tsushima, but they're making a movie out of it. It's likely we'll see the PC Port around the movie's release.
It wouldn't make sense to port GT Sport.
Detroit Become Human was ported by another company. Same with Death Stranding.
Infamous would be a questionable one. Do you just randomly port the 3rd game in a franchise similar to Uncharted? There were reasons why Uncharted 4 made the most sense because it would be a lot of work remaking Uncharted 1. The same is true of Infamous, but here there is no movie or tv show and the game didn't sell incredibly well.
So I think the strategy has been really clear, to bring over the PS4 games first and foremost and when it comes to PS5 games give it largely a year or two depending on the importance of the game. A bit more complicated because of the pandemic, new studio acquisitions, and existing projects.
The biggest pieces missing are Demon's Souls and Ghost of Tsushima and both make sense as to why they haven't been ported.
I agree that this is the strategy. The only part that may need adjustment IMO is the time between console and PC versions of current-gen releases. Good point about timing PC ports in line with certain transmedia releases (films, TV shows etc.), but I think that is something which can't be done at the expense of retaining peak value for what these games do for the console. As soon as a PC version is released, there is some cannibalization of console-side sales, but I don't think it's necessarily only specific to that game. There's likely a bleed-over effect to other games, 1P & 3P, as well, across the whole platform. That's why when you do such a port as a platform holder, it should be as much in the tail end of the game's natural lifecycle as possible, and IMO the natural lifecycle is however long the game exists until the sequel (or an equivalent new release from the studio) is due for release.
So, we know how long it takes for modern AAA releases to be made. That's why IMO 1-2 years should be closer to 4-6. I think some of the transmedia projects can be adjusted for revolving around that type of cycle, since those projects are dependent on the game IP themselves. They can (and should) make exceptions for non-traditional titles though, such as GaaS/live service releases. When/if Factions 2 is finished, for example, I don't see a reason not to make it Day 1 between console and PC. But just make sure you let console players get some really good perks (mainly cosmetics or things that don't result in rigging balance in favor of one platform over another) tied to PS Plus subscriptions. Things like that are gestures of goodwill for them, since they're the ones paying for online play (while PC gamers aren't).