Jump to content

Games removed off of PS Network


neobowler

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, neobowler said:

Is there a way to know ahead of time when a game or dlc is being removed from the PS store?

most of the time no, there is not. bc PS of cause don't want anyone to notice something is missing. It make their amount of games appear "more"

sometimes it is bc of the publisher or a licence and in that case it is possible to learn about it via newswebsites or blogs of the party in question but no guarantee here, they all decide for themself if they talk about it.

Edited by Ai-ds_low
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could search about the game to see news about it, then find out it will be delisted/the servers will shut down, but sometimes they remove things from the PS Store without any warning... for example, there was a point where both Transformers Devastation and The Legend of Korra were removed from the PS Store + Steam without any warning from PlatinumGames or Activision prior. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Ai-ds_low said:

bc PS of cause don't want anyone to notice something is missing. It make their amount of games appear "more"

 

It's frowned upon to just make up reasons when someone is asking a legitimate question they're curious about. If you have sources to back up your reasons, please share them here.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, DaivRules said:

 

It's frowned upon to just make up reasons when someone is asking a legitimate question they're curious about. If you have sources to back up your reasons, please share them here.

I just have a background in marketing, I was trained in an onlinemarketing agency. this is a classic rule for online shops. To give a feeling of a great selection, so the customer thinks he can purchase almost everything. So you build your shop a bit unclear arranged and hide when you take products off your shop because it can give a feeling of negativity.

Thats what you learn in online marketing. Maybe Sony/PS has other reasons, too. But thats not made up, Sony is a corporation to gain money, why shouldn't they use the same marketing concepts like everyone does?

Edited by Ai-ds_low
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ai-ds_low said:

I just have a background in marketing, I was trained in an onlinemarketing agency. this is a classic rule for online shops. To give a feeling of a great selection, so the customer thinks he can purchase almost everything. So you build your shop a bit unclear arranged and hide when you take products off your shop because it can give a feeling of negativity.

Thats what you learn in online marketing. Maybe Sony/PS has other reasons, too. But thats not made up, Sony is a corporation to gain money, why shouldn't they use the same marketing concepts like everyone does?

 

That’s not evidence that Sony has the same business practice. Just because one or some companies have dumb policies like you studied, does not mean all do.

When you speculate again in the future like you did here, you should not frame it as a fact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

 

That’s not evidence that Sony has the same business practice. Just because one or some companies have dumb policies like you studied, does not mean all do.

When you speculate again in the future like you did here, you should not frame it as a fact. 

you shoudn't call common business practises dumb just because you don't know they exist.

I assume there are lots of those. And most of them a customer wouldn't exactly think positive about.

 

@topic, this is a common practise, it is very likely sony take it into account, bc it is usual, they will at least think about a negative effect. you will NEVER find evidence if they really do bc it would be dumb to reveal all your practises for any company, but it is far from being just speculation.

 

And now calm down, thats how the world works, and yes the more I learned about it the more I hated the facts but that doesn't mean they aren't real unfortunately. End of discussion, I don't like to fight on a website where WE should have fun together, I don't even understand the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ai-ds_low said:

you shoudn't call common business practises dumb just because you don't know they exist.

I assume there are lots of those. And most of them a customer wouldn't exactly think positive about.

 

@topic, this is a common practise, it is very likely sony take it into account, bc it is usual, they will at least think about a negative effect. you will NEVER find evidence if they really do bc it would be dumb to reveal all your practises for any company, but it is far from being just speculation.

 

And now calm down, thats how the world works, and yes the more I learned about it the more I hated the facts but that doesn't mean they aren't real unfortunately. End of discussion, I don't like to fight on a website where WE should have fun together, I don't even understand the problem.

 

Speculation is that actually Sony is held to binding NDA (non-disclosure agreements) about their licenses, including those expiring soon or already expired. In that case, it's the license holder restricting communication about their own content. More facts back up this reason than your "Sony is always malicious"  theory.

 

That's how the real world works.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaivRules said:

 

Speculation is that actually Sony is held to binding NDA (non-disclosure agreements) about their licenses, including those expiring soon or already expired. In that case, it's the license holder restricting communication about their own content. More facts back up this reason than your "Sony is always malicious"  theory.

 

That's how the real world works.

 

15 minutes ago, Fumaku said:

 @ DaivRules But thats only a speculation, right? No one knows what Sony does or doesnt except Sony itself and they wont share it with anyone, why games are removed or not.

 

You are correct. It's speculation (as I put in my message, clearly indicating so) because that's what's in the contract when you sign up to be a Sony developer, but those are up for debate when negotiating with Sony. A signed contract is not allowed to be released to comply with the NDA, hence speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaivRules said:

 

Speculation is that actually Sony is held to binding NDA (non-disclosure agreements) about their licenses, including those expiring soon or already expired. In that case, it's the license holder restricting communication about their own content. More facts back up this reason than your "Sony is always malicious"  theory.

 

That's how the real world works.

I never said sony is always malicious(I like sony so far). I say I know every company is, that is found to gain money.

Bc thats the work I do and my agency does. You don't hire a specialist in marketing communication to give pple the truth but to give them what they want to hear.

If you don't see it yet, well I would love to live in your pink bubble.

And no one said anything about licences.

WHY something is removed from the store was never the question.

we won't know that except sony or the licence holder talk about it. but it's almost always a problem like sony had with plants VS Zombies, I think the licence holder changed, I don't remember but sony couldn't get a new licence/extension. Thats kind of bad publicity and they hid it until the first users wanted to purchase the game and couldn't find it. Then they said they had to remove it. not earlier.

I don't even say thats malicious reasons like you said. I say thats how marketing works as far as I have seen it.

Seriously, whats your background again? I never worked in gaming industry, only with online shops in general, I think there is a lot more to learn about their practises, maybe you should give it a try, make the world a better playe or something.

Over and out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember back when Turtles in Time Re-Shelled was coming off the store, they had a "Last Chance!" banner for the game on the store itself. It's just as likely that if it was all Sony's decision, they would advertise games coming off in hopes of making a few more sales before they lost the title. I'm speculating as well, but I think it's likely that any additional sales would outweigh the "negative press" of losing a tiny portion of their catalog.

 

I personally doubt that intentionally trying to hide such a loss would be a part of their strategy. It just doesn't make sense to me in the context of digital content on a gaming console, regardless of how or where it might otherwise apply. Just my two cents.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bumperklever said:

Both of your points are speculations and can even be practised together. So why the discussion, because 1 speculation is better then the other? well congrats.

 

They absolutely can. Not the point. The point is the responsibility of how it's presented. I clearly indicated mine was speculation. The other was presented as fact. That's why the discussion, neither is better, one just has more evidence. And thank you.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...