​

What exactly does PlayStation have in store for the future of their latest console? Find out today, on the latest episode of PlayStation Showcase. There's going to be plenty to show during this livestream, and we'll be rounding it all up and noting every announcement made.

Live Coverage

Jim Ryan kicks off the show.

First shown off is a Star Wars game. Knights of the Old Republic is getting remade for PS5.

The next game is a Japanese action RPG called Project Eve, being developed by Shift Up.

​

We get another look at Tiny Tina's Wonderlands, launching on March 25th.

A girl gets thrown into another dimension where she has parkour skills in a fantasy setting. Lots of sarcastic snark. Action combat. Forspoken. Spring 2022.

​

Alan Wake Remastered is out October 5th. We get a new trailer for the re-release, with new graphics.

Grand Theft Auto V's latest port shows its features, which include seamless character switching and GTA Online. Available this March.

Ghostwire Tokyo has a new cinematic trailer.

​

Marvel and Eidos are next, with the Guardians of the Galaxy game previous revealed earlier this year. Oct. 26.

Third-person combat, multiple classes, and more are shown in Vampire: Blood Hunt, releasing later this year.

Arkane is back with their upcoming Deathloop, where we hear more about the characters and story.

​

Epic Games is releasing a new game on the PS5, featuring Radiohead. It's called Kid A mnesia Exhibition and will be out this October.

Sail, explore, and swim, or just turn into tons of different animals in the next game. Has a very cartoon-y Wind Waker aesthetic. Titled Tchia.

​

Uncharted 4 and Lost Legacy are being remastered for PS5...and PC.

Insomniac is up next. They're making a Wolverine game, now.

Cars are plentiful in the pretty trailer for Gran Turismo 7.

Back to Insomniac, with Spider-Man. They're also working on Spider-Man 2, featuring Venom, set for release in 2023.

​

Time for God of War: Ragnarok. Following the last game, we see Kratos and Atreus. There's lots of hard-hitting combat, just like before.

 

[D34DL1N3R]

flexing how many consoles you have doesnt prove your point, it just makes you look like a douche

Posting your hatred for Sony in a Sony topic doesn't prove your point, it just makes you look like a douche.See how easy that is. LOL. It's like me going to a Justin Beiber forum, when I'm ALREADY not a fan of him, and going off about how much he sucks. But by all means, please do keep going on with your bad self.

 

[64bitmodels]

Posting your hatred for Sony in a Sony topic doesn't prove your point, it just makes you look like a douche.See how easy that is. LOL. It's like me going to a Justin Beiber forum, when I'm ALREADY not a fan of him, and going off about how much he sucks. But by all means, please do keep going on with your bad self.

i'm not "posting my hatred for sony", i'm going over the list of reasons on why the show was objectively shit. my hatred toward sony doesnt have to do with the fact that it was yet another generic 2010s trailer full of sequels, remakes, and "new IPs" that look like the same shit that's been done before yet again. overly cinematic third person hack and slashes/shooters that have 0 unique art direction and are the same shit again are objectively bad, especially when you see a lot of them flooding the industry nowadays. but go ahead and talk about how "you're just too poor and stupid to get a ps5" or some shit

 

[Valwinz]

Looks like someone cannot afford what they see.

i purchase 2 switch OLED and are fully paid

I can afford to buy good games not generic games like sony shows

 

[Augusto101]

i'm not "posting my hatred for sony", i'm going over the list of reasons on why the show was objectively shit. my hatred toward sony doesnt have to do with the fact that it was yet another generic 2010s trailer full of sequels, remakes, and "new IPs" that look like the same shit that's been done before yet again. overly cinematic third person hack and slashes/shooters that have 0 unique art direction and are the same shit again are objectively bad, especially when you see a lot of them flooding the industry nowadays. but go ahead and talk about how "you're just too poor and stupid to get a ps5" or some shit

well played dude you just humiliated the fanboy glad to see smart people from time to time.

 

[MikaDubbz]

KOTOR/Wolverine/Spider Man/God of War/Forspoken were the highlights for me. I kind of feel weird that Insomniac seems to be making all the games for the PS5 nowadays.

I just think it kinda sucks to see specific Marvel properties be locked to specific consoles now. I mean I typically love seeing great exclusives for any system, but it kinda feels dirty when it happens to a beloved media property that originates outside of video games. Superhero games just seem like something that naturally would be available for every system, but now that's changing and I'm not so crazy about it. It'd be like if suddenly The Simpsons games became Nintendo exclusive or DBZ games became Xbox exclusive. These are the kinds of properties that don't feel right not being multiplatform.

 

[subcon959]

I just think it kinda sucks to see specific Marvel properties be locked to specific consoles now. I mean I typically love seeing great exclusives for any system, but it kinda feels dirty when it happens to a beloved media property that originates outside of video games. Superhero games just seem like something that naturally would be available for every system, but now that's changing and I'm not so crazy about it. It'd be like if suddenly The Simpsons games became Nintendo exclusive or DBZ games became Xbox exclusive. These are the kinds of properties that don't feel right not being multiplatform.

I'm sure Microsoft would do the same if they were the ones distributing the movies. It's not entirely exclusive to Playstation though, the first time I played Spider Man was on PC through PS Now.

 

[Lazyboss]

i purchase 2 switch OLED and are fully paid

I can afford to buy good games not generic games like sony shows

2 OLED Switch? Now I understand.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I mean
are you really willing to pay 900 dollars for a scalped ps5 and 70 dollars for games?
just cuz someone doesnt like what they see doesnt mean they cant fucking afford it

They don't need to bother commenting on something they didn't play either, just for the sake of hating.

 

[MikaDubbz]

I'm sure Microsoft would do the same if they were the ones distributing the movies. It's not entirely exclusive to Playstation though, the first time I played Spider Man was on PC through PS Now.

I really don't care if Microsoft would do the same or not, I just think it sucks to see happen for properties that don't feel like it should happen to (also, Sony doesn't have anything to do with the X-Men movies, so I can't grant Wolverine the same forgiveness that I can give the Spider-Man games. Plus prior to this third film reboot of Spider-Man, Spidey games would still release multiplat even though back then Sony still had the Spider-Man film license). And I feel like it goes without saying in this day and age that PC may have seen a release as well, but when talking about console exclusivity, ya kinda just omit the whole PC aspect at this point. After all, if we always count PC, then Xbox straight up doesn't have any exclusives anymore. But I don't really view it that way personally.

 

[pedro702]

not everybody can just casually walk up to a store and get a game- not everybody wants to walk up to a store and get a game. especially when some people out there don't have cars.

i never walk to there i order online get it at home(2 euros delivery) or the closest store, they are all preety close and very spread-out across the country since they are part of the major supermarket retailers and where is that supermarket the store is right next to it.

 

[subcon959]

After all, if we always count PC, then Xbox straight up doesn't have any exclusives anymore. But I don't really view it that way personally.

I think it's a valid way to view it, if you have a decent PC then it doesn't make much sense to buy an Xbox (if you don't have a decent PC the Series consoles are amazing value for money). it isn't necessarily a negative though. Unlike Playstation, Xbox emphasis isn't about the hardware, it's about the ecosystem. Microsoft just wants people playing the games whether it's on PC or Xbox or some other streaming device. Sony definitely cares more about people buying the console (although recently the light bulb seems to have turned on to some extent with all the PC releases).

 

[MikaDubbz]

I think it's a valid way to view it, if you have a decent PC then it doesn't make much sense to buy an Xbox (if you don't have a decent PC the Series consoles are amazing value for money). it isn't necessarily a negative though. Unlike Playstation, Xbox emphasis isn't about the hardware, it's about the ecosystem. Microsoft just wants people playing the games whether it's on PC or Xbox or some other streaming device. Sony definitely cares more about people buying the console (although recently the light bulb seems to have turned on to some extent with all the PC releases).

To each their own, I'm just telling you how I view it and how I frame it. I always disregard PC, because at the end of the day, nearly anything and everything can be played on a PC in one way or another. Plus I'm clearly talking about multiplat in the sense of these games should naturally come to PlayStation and Xbox, and possibly even Nintendo if there is a build that can run on the system. The whole splitting hairs thing over, well it also came out for PC, is really missing my point entirely.

 

[subcon959]

To each their own, I'm just telling you how I view it and how I frame it. I always disregard PC, because at the end of the day, nearly anything and everything can be played on a PC in one way or another.

Yes, emulation has been an amazing bonus. But the cost of entry is increasingly high and so consoles are very relevant still. But if we disregard PC and just go with how you have framed it then the only logical conclusion is that exclusivity of any kind is anti-consumer and therefore every console maker out there is the problem.

 

[MikaDubbz]

Yes, emulation has been an amazing bonus. But the cost of entry is increasingly high and so consoles are very relevant still. But if we disregard PC and just go with how you have framed it then the only logical conclusion is that exclusivity of any kind is anti-consumer and therefore every console maker out there is the problem.

My point has been that I'm all for exclusivity with IPs that strictly belong to the console maker. I have no problem with Mario being Nintendo, Ratchet and Clank being Sony, Halo being Xbox, and those things only going to those systems. But when you take previously multiplatform things that originated outside of gaming to begin with, make theme exclusive, then I quickly have a problem. I never want to see a Mario game on a Playstation or Xbox, but conversely, I never want to see Madden only available on Xbox. There is a logic to what should or shouldn't be multiplatform, and for me, Marvel properties do not fall in the "should be exclusive" category at all.

 

[subcon959]

My point has been that I'm all for exclusivity with IPs that strictly belong to the console maker. I have no problem with Mario being Nintendo, Ratchet and Clank being Sony, Halo being Xbox, and those things only going to those systems. But when you take previously multiplatform things that originated outside of gaming to begin with, make theme exclusive, then I quickly have a problem. I never want to see a Mario game on a Playstation or Xbox, but conversely, I never want to see Madden only available on Xbox. There is a logic to what should or shouldn't be multiplatform, and for me, Marvel properties do not fall in the "should be exclusive" category at all.

I doubt that will change so we're back to the only solution being to game on PC.

 

[pedro702]

Yes, emulation has been an amazing bonus. But the cost of entry is increasingly high and so consoles are very relevant still. But if we disregard PC and just go with how you have framed it then the only logical conclusion is that exclusivity of any kind is anti-consumer and therefore every console maker out there is the problem.

LOL ,so im a small time dev, i made a game for a console lets say ps5, but because i havent ported the game to all other consoles and pc im now considered an anti consumer? does the government just gives out money for devs to port their games everywhere?

You do know there is time and work involved on porting games, its not just click and its done, so i dont think any game that is exclusive is anti consumer just because it wasnt released on other consoles/pc that is really stupid thing to say imo.

 

[MikaDubbz]

I doubt that will change so we're back to the only solution being to game on PC.

I'm not demanding change, I'm just voicing my displeasure of seeing such a thing happen to such properties. And hopefully other similar franchises don't end up following suit.

 

[subcon959]

LOL ,so im a small time dev, i made a game for a console lets say ps5, but because i havent ported the game to all other consoles and pc im now considered an anti consumer? does the government just gives out money for devs to port their games everywhere?

You do know there is time and work involved on porting games, its not just click and its done, so i dont think any game that is exclusive is anti consumer just because it wasnt released on other consoles/pc that is really stupid thing to say imo.

Are you a console maker? If not then everything you said is irrelevant to the point I made.

 

[64bitmodels]

LOL ,so im a small time dev, i made a game for a console lets say ps5, but because i havent ported the game to all other consoles and pc im now considered an anti consumer? does the government just gives out money for devs to port their games everywhere?

You do know there is time and work involved on porting games, its not just click and its done, so i dont think any game that is exclusive is anti consumer just because it wasnt released on other consoles/pc that is really stupid thing to say imo.

Be glad you aren't a dev in the 90s or 00s. porting games in those times was hard AF since nearly every console had a different specialized architecture
nowadays everything's x86 so porting is far easier. still difficult like you said, but much easier

 

[pedro702]

Are you a console maker? If not then everything you said is irrelevant to the point I made.

what does it matter?you said anyone that makes software for one console only is anti-consumer which is bs imo, doesnt matter if you are a console maker or not, if you were hard at working on a game to put it on said platform and dont think there isnt enough benefit to put it on another platform that is not anti consumerism.

take a look at lets say bayoneta, the ip was dead, and they didnt intend on doing anything with it, nintendo said, hey we liked it, here is some money to make us a sequel, and they did, obviously they made the game for nintendo, now were they anti consumers? should nintendo pay to port the game to sony/microsoft and pc? cant they pay just for themselves? nintendo doesnt own the ip but they paid for that game so i dont see why they need to pay for porting to other systems or be considered anti consumers.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Be glad you aren't a dev in the 90s or 00s. porting games in those times was hard AF since nearly every console had a different specialized architecture
nowadays everything's x86 so porting is far easier. still difficult like you said, but much easier

doesnt matter it still takes time and money, heck you saw quake remaster stuff? to port it to the switch they had to do lots of changes on how the engine did certain things and whatnot, so it depends on the game and everything else, if porting was so easy every single game was released same day on every console, lots of indie games come out on one console, and if they actually make a profit they port it to others and so on.

heck many indie games on pc sell like crap and its only when they hit like switch or ps5 that they actually make any money, sometimes their pc release got them almost no revenue.

 

[64bitmodels]

what does it matter?you said anyone that makes software for one console only is anti-consumer which is bs imo, doesnt matter if you are a console maker or not, if you were hard at working on a game to put it on said platform and dont think there isnt enough benefit to put it on another platform that is not anti consumerism.

take a look at lets say bayoneta, the ip was dead, and they didnt intend on doing anything with it, nintendo said, hey we liked it, here is some money to make us a sequel, and they did, obviously they made the game for nintendo, now were they anti consumers? should nintendo pay to port the game to sony/microsoft and pc? cant they pay just for themselves? nintendo doesnt own the ip but they paid for that game so i dont see why they need to pay for porting to other systems or be considered anti consumers.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------


doesnt matter it still takes time and money, heck you saw quake remaster stuff? to port it to the switch they had to do lots of changes on how the engine did certain things and whatnot, so it depends on the game and everything else, if porting was so easy every single game was released same day on every console, lots of indie games come out on one console, and if they actually make a profit they port it to others and so on.

heck many indie games on pc sell like crap and its only when they hit like switch or ps5 that they actually make any money, sometimes their pc release got them almost no revenue.

why arent more indies developed exclusively for the switch then