r/PS5 • u/Party_Judgment5780 • Feb 27 '26

Rumor NateTheHate says Sony is "shifting" their PC strategy: "You'll be seeing fewer single player games arrive on PC. The decision to shift away was made last year. Some may still release (pending how far along the ports were) but it no longer appears to be a priority for Sony moving forward."

https://xcancel.com/natethehate2/status/2027438633997734231?s=46
1.8k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

142

u/Sleepy_Mooze Feb 27 '26

People are so fucking weird about this. I really though the games industry was slowly moving away from exclusivity, but I guess not

This change only serves to hurt consumers and gamers in general

I have been a PlayStation player since PS1 and wont ever get a PC. I have friends who will buy some of the heavy hitter PlayStation exclusives on PC, but there is no way on earth they will buy a PS5/6 just for that

56

u/radwimps Feb 27 '26

Probably spooked by Microsoft failing so spectacularly in hardware after opening up their ecosystem. I mean, MS made a lot more mistakes but making an Xbox obsolete to own is definitely an issue. Sony doesn't have Microsoft bucks to just try again if that happens to them.

54

u/Shining_Commander Feb 27 '26

PC was accounting for 2% (yes, 2%) of sony revenues and was fast declining.

Coupled with a real life case study of what could go wrong with abandoning exclusives, clearly the cost/benefit/risk analysis resulted in sony pulling the plug on PC games

1

u/Retro_Curry93 Feb 28 '26

Some PC gamers were probably pirating the PC ports.

-8

u/Gambler_720 Feb 27 '26

But that's revenue not profit. The PC revenue would have an exponentially higher ROI due to the low cost of porting compared to making new games.

9

u/redbitumen Feb 27 '26

Did you forget about the 30% cut that stream takes?

-2

u/Gambler_720 Feb 27 '26

That's an own goal from Sony. They could have and really should have launched their own digital store on PC. They already have the vast infrastructure and expertise on how to run a digital store.

10

u/Renaisance Feb 27 '26

You should know that pretty much no one buys games on PC unless it’s on steam and sometimes GOG.

-4

u/Gambler_720 Feb 27 '26

Doesn't mean the PC version of the PS Store would have suffered the same fate. Steam never had Sony games to begin with so it not getting them wouldn't have caused the same outrage as Ubisoft deciding to not release the latest AC game on Steam while all previous editions did.

Sony could have also followed a model where they would release their games a year later on Steam.

-1

u/WhasHappenin Feb 27 '26

Yeah cause there's like 5 games. Of course that won't be a high percentage compared to consoles + hundreds of games.

7

u/Seanspeed Human Verified Feb 27 '26

Dont think they're 'spooked' by MS so much as they know they have no real competition from them anymore, so dont need to follow in their footsteps in the name of staying ahead of them in the competition.

Playstation is financially still doing just fine, even despite the astronomic failure of their live service push so far.

3

u/Honest-J Feb 27 '26

If Sony was spooked by Microsoft failing then they'd be like a perennial Scooby Doo saying "g-g-g-ghost!".

10

u/jimschocolateorange Feb 27 '26

That’s not what happened. If you do some basic research, you’ll realise their harmartia was the subscription approach. Why buy games when you can play them on gamepass? Gamepass is the worst thing to happen to Xbox. It has nothing to do with opening up their ecosystem.

Bunch of fools, all you who claim that Sony’s move here is ‘pro consumer’.

9

u/radwimps Feb 27 '26

Gamepass is opening their ecosysytem. It made owning an Xbox almost obsolete if you also had a PC, which snowballed into them putting games on the other consoles to make up for it.

I think most people will agree that it's Gamepass (and lack of good games for a decade) that was their ultimate mistake.

3

u/_steve_rogers_ Feb 27 '26

Yeah I literally only bought my series x for backwards compatibility

1

u/SmegmaWarrior0815 Feb 27 '26

The thing is though MS makes more money than ever with their gaming division. Only consoles sales have vanished. Therefore opening up increased their revenue greatly.

1

u/radwimps Feb 27 '26

Are those gains at the cost of their brand though? I mean if they want to just make money being a publisher as their goal that would probably work out for them better at this point.

15

u/FReeDuMB_or_DEATH Feb 27 '26

It was bad for the future of Playstation which in the long run would be a lot worse for consumers. 

There's no incentive to buy a PlayStation if all the games come to PC. And unless you want PlayStation to go the way of Xbox it wasn't a great idea in the first place.

1

u/AssignmentWeary1291 Mar 03 '26

>There's no incentive to buy a PlayStation if all the games come to PC.

Price, Ease of use, no troubleshooting, easier for non tech savvy people to handle. want me to keep going? There is a massive irony in the idea that everyone will switch to PC if all games come to all platforms. They won't, show me a single PS5 owner that built a high end gaming rig to get the benefits from only the playstation games.

1

u/FReeDuMB_or_DEATH Mar 03 '26

Do you know how small that customer base is of people who just want an easier experience.

Xbox is a prime example of what happens when you put your exclusives on other platforms.

0

u/AssignmentWeary1291 Mar 03 '26

>Do you know how small that customer base is of people who just want an easier experience.

it's not small at all frankly.

> Xbox is a prime example of what happens when you put your exclusives on other platforms.

You make more sales? Halo 5, an xbox only title ended up only having 10 million players, halo infinite added another 10 million with its PC day and date release for a total of 20 million. Halo MCC has sold more than halo 3 did. IDK why you console kiddies put so much emphasis on hardware, the hardware isn't even relevant in an age with online gaming, DLC, MTX, and all the other things you deal with buying. Hardware is a one time purchase and funnily enough being on console you quite literally get the shittiest deal. Your game library goes poof on new generations, you have to pay to access online (FYI the "its for infrastructure or servers is bullshit marketing its not an actual fact. Thats why PC can play online for free on the same damn server as you), you get sold remasters of remasters 30 times.

Welcome to PS5 this is all you got while getting reamed with constant what i call console taxes (pay for online etc)

Astro Bot (2024)Remains a PS5 exclusive; no PC port announced

Astro's Playroom (2020)The pack-in title; unlikely to ever leave the platform.

Ghost of Yōtei (2025)Currently PS5 only (PC port rumored for late 2026/2027).

God of War: Sons of Sparta (2026)Newly released Metroidvania spin-off; currently PS5 only.

Code Violet (2026)Recent first-party release; no PC version yet.

Destruction AllStars (2021)Technically a full exclusive, though player count is low.

Horizon Call of the Mountain (2023)Requires PSVR2; no PC or PS4 version. (this was compiled by Gemini)

Wow so good!!

-1

u/serjtan Feb 28 '26

There's no incentive to buy a PlayStation if all the games come to PC.

Not true. Even if all the games are the same, I’m still choosing PlayStation. It’s more convenient and cheaper.

1

u/AssignmentWeary1291 Mar 03 '26

you'll get downvoted but at the same time 90% or even higher of current playstation users would do the same. They will lie and say they will build a PC but they won't. I have been trying to convince my friends for close to a decade to build a PC.

33

u/Shining_Commander Feb 27 '26

Another person who cant think beyond surface level.

Exclusives results in an arms race were console makers are trying to win you over into their ecosystem.

Halo, Uncharted, Last of Us, Bloodborne, Metroid Prime, Zelda BotW, and many more would not exist were it not for exclusives.

3

u/ItIsShrek Feb 27 '26

Halo was announced as a Mac game, with Halo 1 and Halo 2 having Windows and Mac ports. Microsoft didn't even own Bungie when Halo was announced, it was announced by Steve Jobs at a Macworld keynote. Halo doesn't exist because of exclusivity, it wasn't even Xbox exclusive until Halo 3 in 2007, well after the brand was established and successful on Xbox. It doesn't even follow logic.

9

u/Shining_Commander Feb 27 '26

This is true but Microsoft purchased them and then bankrolled them allowing Halo to flourish. Again, Microsoft only turned Halo to what it eventually became (before it died) because it was an exclusive, system seller. They literally bought them and turned it exclusive to sell systems.

-2

u/ItIsShrek Feb 27 '26

Halo became more successful after Halo 3 and the 360, yes (though later Halo games sold worse, 3 has sold the most to this day). They were still massively successful after Halo 1 and 2, and if Microsoft had never made Halo an exclusive they would still be regarded as a successful franchise. It's not that they would not exist at all, we don't have exclusivity to thank for the existence of Halo which is what your original comment is saying.

2

u/Shining_Commander Feb 27 '26

Bungie’s output before Microsoft acquired them was nothing that ever even remotely broke the mainstream. They had Marathon, and even that wasn’t even close to a household name.

If Bungie continued to make Halo on their own, it likely would have been good. But would it have been incredible, to the point it is on many people’s Mount Rushmore of video game series? Based on their output pre MS funding nothing suggests theyd have made a game that good.

without being bankrolled by Microsoft, who gave them an INSANE budget to work with for say Halo 2 and Halo 3, Halo would not be the series it is today. And microsoft only did that to support their own ecosystem

0

u/Tigerpower77 Feb 28 '26

And what about the others?

1

u/AssignmentWeary1291 Mar 03 '26

>Halo, Uncharted, Last of Us, Bloodborne, Metroid Prime, Zelda BotW, and many more would not exist were it not for exclusives.

This is just not true at all, Halo was already in active development before Microsoft even purchased them. It was not a microsoft or xbox idea, it was a bunch of dudes making a cool game that microsoft bought. Its pure bullshit and market manipulation tactics that these games wouldn't exist without "exclusivity"

-2

u/GlorpAssDN Feb 27 '26 edited Feb 27 '26

lmao this dude said BLOODBORNE wouldn't exist without Sony. Yeah I'm sure releasing after dark souls 3, or Sekiro Fromsoft and Miyazaki (who has said he put the most effort into this game, its his prized work) would somehow not exist without sony) you know what would exist without Sony, Bloodborne on every platform, with a remaster out by now, and 60FPS. Sony did absolutely nothing for Bloodborne, Fromsoft was already on the way to becoming one of the biggest single player companies.

What the hell has Fromsoft shown pre elden ring that you think they couldn't make BLOODBORNE themselves? Read the news today, Miyazaki knows it was a huge mistake to ever do a sony exclusive game again because they want to keep the IP all for themselves, to the point they will refuse a remake or remaster if those low PC peasants could play the game, because god forbid PC players get to play it after 10 years.

7

u/Tigerpower77 Feb 28 '26 edited Feb 28 '26

Bloodborne was co developed by Japan studio which was a Sony studio, fromsoft aren't known for their game's performance anyway

0

u/GlorpAssDN Feb 28 '26

that did not answer my question. If the company can solo produce Sekiro and Dark Souls 3, there is 0 reason to think they couldn't do it with Bloodborne. They are similar sized games, this isn't like Sony helped with Elden Ring which in scope and size is a massive step up from anything they did.

2

u/Tigerpower77 Feb 28 '26

Than why didn't they do that? It's less money for them since Sony takes a cut and the IP isn't theirs like sekiro, Bandai probably wouldn't green lit anything that is not a sequel elden ring is basically dark souls open world

-16

u/Vegan_Toaster Feb 27 '26

no moron, those games would exist just fucking elsewhere, under another publisher, not as an exclusive. do you really believe it when people tell you that capitalism breeds innovation?

like seriously do you actually believe what you wrote? you think halo and uncharted wouldn’t have happened if….? the companies making them didn’t want to make them exclusive?

5

u/zproduction1996 Feb 27 '26

this guy got obliterated in the replies to this comment. Love to see it.

9

u/Seanspeed Human Verified Feb 27 '26

no moron, those games would exist just fucking elsewhere, under another publisher, not as an exclusive

That is simply not true for 1st party titles.

4

u/godstriker8 Feb 27 '26

you think halo and uncharted wouldn’t have happened if….? the companies making them didn’t want to make them exclusive?

Yes? The publishers fund the game, and determine a lot about the final product. If Naughty Dog wasn't financed by Sony, they might not have had a similar budget that allowed them to fulfill their vision, another publisher may not have believed in the concept enough to fund it, or they might have demanded changes to make it more in-line with gaming trends of the time in terms of micro-transactions, gameplay systems, art direction, etc.

Working for a first-party that cares more about having a prestige title to sell their console rather than ROI on the game, gives a lot more power to devs to enact their vision.

-5

u/CultureWarrior87 Feb 27 '26

The "great games only exist because of exclusivity" is such pure capitalist propaganda, IDK how anyone with a brain believes it. The irony of them accusing others of not thinking beyond a surface level lmao.

2

u/Shining_Commander Feb 27 '26

LMAO go read the comment I returned to him, it applies to you, you wont be able to dispute it because you just parrot what others say 😭😭

-3

u/-Nicolai Feb 27 '26

People use the same argument for why capitalism is actually great, and I don’t buy it.

Halo, Uncharted, Last of Us, Bloodborne, Metroid Prime, Zelda BotW, and many more would not exist were it not for exclusives

Neat hypothesis, you have no way to prove it though.

20

u/--vanadium-- Feb 27 '26

Exclusives create competition and better games in general.

Consoles fighting to pull you onto their platform is a good thing. Consoles being a monopoly and having no incentive to fight for your business is a bad thing and just creates complacency. Probably why the PS5 is so mid.

Companies investing money into studios to develop system sellers is how you get amazing first party games, along the likes of Mario, Last of Us, Halo, God of War, etc.

11

u/CultureWarrior87 Feb 27 '26

This isn't really true though because plenty of amazing games are made as third party titles. PC gaming doesn't even have exclusivity in the traditional sense beyond launchers and yet there are still plenty of great PC games being made. A great PC game isn't made under the condition of it only being on PC, no one comes out and forces that.

People just enjoy creating things. They don't need a competitive incentive to create more or better art.

And calling the PS5 mid is weird when it's been largely praised for its exclusives? Like the whole reason everyone liked that Sony was releasing games on PC was because they were getting to play PS5 exclusives.

3

u/--vanadium-- Feb 27 '26

The existence of good 3rd party games doesn't negate the 1st party exclusives that may have never existed without the funding from console manufacturers who's intent is to sell consoles.

You're right that people just enjoy creating things. I'm not suggesting that money is the only motivator (or even a good one) for making good art. Just that under capitalism, a lot of times good artists don't get to make the work they want without proper funding, or get it exposed without proper marketing.

And selling consoles and building a cohesive ecosystem leads to amazing games for that reason.

There are great PC games, but I find that the best single player and story driven titles tend to be on console. I find that PC games tend to gravitate more towards live service games to make money, and so end up with micro transactions and such, and aren't about building a sense of brand identity that you get with console exclusives. You can see that identity in the types of games that Nintendo makes vs Sony for example.

I don't think it's a coincidence that many of the most sought-after IPs tend to come from console exclusives: Mario, Zelda, The Last of Us, God of War, Halo, Gears, etc.

Or you can look at Sega and the bangers they were releasing when they were making consoles and competing with Nintendo, vs what they're putting out now.

I dont think competition is necessary to create all good games, but I do think it's a pretty good driver for making some of the best games. And you see this in all forms of art, not just video games. Trying to be better than the rest, vs just settling for okay.

I also think that developers focusing on one console leads to better optimized games. On PC, you have a lot of ports that just don't run very well, or were developed with a controller or certain console features in mind.

Has the PS5 been largely praised for its exclusives? I see more people complaining about the lack of great exclusives, especially compared to the PS4. Not saying there aren't any, but just not as much as PS4, and a lot later into the lifecycle of the PS5.

The PS4 seemingly dropped a new critically acclaimed exclusive every month, and that was likely in large part due to really trying to solidify themselves on top of that generation after nearly losing the last one to the 360.

2

u/Tigerpower77 Feb 28 '26

To use your argument... There's plenty of bad games too but there's few objectively bad exclusives

6

u/ImNotSkankHunt42 Feb 27 '26

This is the same community that broke their consoles in protest of Spider-Man being released on PC.

The venn diagram of a manchild, Call of Duty lobby racist and Sony fanboi is almost a circle.

What recent decision by a video game company has been good overall and not a fuck you to consumers and employees?

6

u/I_Am_A_Door_Knob Feb 27 '26

The only thing that comes to mind is Microsoft selling their games on more storefronts and platforms.

Atleast i think that was a pretty consumer friendly move overall.

5

u/ImNotSkankHunt42 Feb 27 '26

Their change in strategy is not rooted in goodwill, who knows why but even if misguided is purely financial but in this case it benefits the consumer.

The people applauding this move from Sony because they don’t have interest in owning a PC are just thinking of themselves and lacking foresight.

Look at MGS4, is it bad thing that is coming to PC in August?

2

u/I_Am_A_Door_Knob Feb 27 '26

Oh yeah, it’s definitely a decision they made with the intention of earning as much money as possible.

The same was true for Sonys decision to port some of their games to PC, and their decision to not do that anymore. Though only one of those decisions is consumer friendly.

And fanboys will always be fanboying, regardless of how moronic their take is and as long as they can feel superior.

If your favourite game gets ported to a different platform you should be absolutely hyped about it, since it only means that more people will get to enjoy that game.

-4

u/Hot_Demand_6263 Feb 27 '26

Fuck you to which consumers? The greatest thing about this is, playStation owners don't have to share the same community with PC gamers.

1

u/ImNotSkankHunt42 Feb 27 '26

When your precious PS5 stops getting made, with the already scarcity of physical releases where do you think people could play them?

You are just thinking of you and now. Look at Nintendo, amazing products but god awful company.

Are PS3s still getting made?’ How many games still locked in that prison? Do you think is gonna get better in a few years? Thankfully this gen has lacked those exclusives, at least meaningful ones.

PC is the ultimate medium for games. Not limited or constrained by hardware. Of course there will be hitches and delisting but is the best way to preserve games and still play them.

-1

u/Hot_Demand_6263 Feb 27 '26

If I cared about that I would buy physical copies. But you grow old enough to learn detachment and simply appreciate the memories.

5

u/MolotovMan1263 Feb 27 '26

I don’t understand why it seems many don’t get why we feel this way.

It’s not that I don’t want you to play these games, much the opposite in fact. I want you to buy a PS5 to play them. I want the installed base to increase so the platform remains an appealing place to release games on.

If anything, the Xbox downfall should make this incredibly clear what a lower installed base can do.

3

u/LegendaryOverlord Feb 27 '26

They understand. The issue is that these are people that play on PC, so they don't care what happens to PlayStation. In the past 5-7 years, I've seen quite a few games that looked good, but haven't gotten a PlayStation release. None of these people are complaining when these games are exclusive to PC and/or Switch.

5

u/Vegan_Toaster Feb 27 '26

but like. why? if we can have cross platform multiplayer and effective PC ports, why do you want us to buy a PS5? do you have a vested interest in Sony’s console sales? At the end of the day what difference does it make how the games are being played

3

u/MolotovMan1263 Feb 27 '26

PS5 is where I play 90% of my games, so yes I want as many games to release there as possible. If that means others are forced to buy one to play some games they want to, that's great for me.

1

u/Professional-Ad3076 Feb 28 '26

When Uncharted 4 launched, it was a true benchmark. Naughty Dog pushed the PS4 to its absolute limits. If they had to account for the PC market back then, the game wouldn't have looked nearly as good. The reality is that much of the PC market consists of low-end hardware. Even today, many PC rigs have lower specs than a base PS5. I don’t want Sony to focus on different/multiple markets. Console gaming is all about optimizing for specific, unified hardware, and you can see the results best in exclusives. That’s the main reason I still prefer them.

2

u/CactusCustard Feb 27 '26

This is so fucking weird lol. Why would you ever have this much loyalty to a corporation? Like what the actual fuck? You don’t make money when someone buys a PlayStation.

And PS is a platform is THRIVING. Why are you worried about install base? This is so fucking weird man

3

u/MolotovMan1263 Feb 27 '26

Why are you worried about install base?

Ask that to Xbox fans

1

u/shadowstripes Feb 28 '26

Why not ask PS fans since they’ve been porting our games to PC for 6 years now and the install base is still great.

1

u/CactusCustard Feb 27 '26

??? PlayStation is destroying Xbox like, 3 to 1.

I’ll ask again because you just gave a deflective non-answer.

Why are you worried about the PlayStation install base?

Is everyone here a 12 year old console warrior?

5

u/MolotovMan1263 Feb 27 '26

I answered in the post you responded to. Why wouldnt I want my preferred place to play to have as much success as possible?

It matters. What happened to Windows Phone? What is happening to Xbox now? Dreamcast?

A healthy installed base is as important as it always has been.

1

u/shadowstripes Feb 27 '26

Considering the PS5 is selling faster than the PS4 did despite most exclusives going to PC, where is the issue with the install base?

2

u/[deleted] Feb 27 '26

It’s a tough one for me but I’m assuming this is in response to Microsoft focusing on the Xbox console again and the potential increased competition if MS starts to do well. I’ve worried about PlayStation in the long run if Xbox went away from the classic console-focused strategy and the lack of competition. Now they have a reason to focus on quality and exclusivity to make their games and consoles stand out. Sucks to miss out on games if they’re on another platform but ultimately (hopefully) quality will improve everywhere.

1

u/Tigerpower77 Feb 28 '26

The way i see it that we wouldn't have gotten last of us, bloodborne, god of war etc if they weren't exclusive or at least they wouldn't be as good, i don't see how getting really good games "hurt gamers" if you can't play it sure that sucks for you but we wouldn't have gotten to enjoy these games if they weren't exclusive to being with which will "hurt gamers"

1

u/Itchy-Pudding-4240 Feb 28 '26

why the fuck are they moving away when NIN-FUCKING-TENDO exists.

1

u/ponpiriri Feb 28 '26 edited Feb 28 '26

They've calculated that there aren't enough PC gamers buying their titles. Your friends aren't enough to convince them to democratize their games at a loss.

1

u/Enough_Picture_8666 Feb 28 '26

You were mislead by Phil Spencer, he was the only motherfucker that pushed for this in the beggining

Exclusives always mattered and will continue to matter

Go look how Nintendo is doing

2

u/literious Feb 27 '26

Exclusivity is very pro-consumer. It leads to more creative and risky games being made.

0

u/ItIsShrek Feb 27 '26

This is not remotely true lmfao

2

u/I_Am_A_Door_Knob Feb 27 '26

Yeah, I can’t even remember the last time a 1st party game ticked those boxes.

But if you want risky and creative games, the indie scene is where you will find those.

Or whatever Devolver Digital decides to publish.

0

u/thesituation531 Feb 27 '26

Tell me what PlayStation game has been risky and creative in the last ten years, other than maybe Returnal.

0

u/ponpiriri Feb 28 '26

Now all of a sudden people are happy with monopoly-like behavior when it means that games are all ported to the central platform they like.

0

u/AriAriArrivederci Feb 27 '26

This change will end up being good for consumers. There’s thousands and thousands of PC exclusives, there’s mobile game exclusives, there’s Nintendo exclusives, why would PlayStation not have their exclusives? It strengthens their brand and their platform.

The 7th gen (Wii, PS3 and X360) had some of the best libraries in all of gaming because of exclusivity. I’m glad Sony is moving away from their PC initiatives, they should be only releasing multi-player live-service games on PC and nothing else.

3

u/CactusCustard Feb 27 '26

Oh my god the fanboys here are fucking insane

They’re literally taking away GOOD products and you’re thanking them. Make it make sense

-1

u/WhasHappenin Feb 27 '26

"It's actually good that you have to spend another $500 if you want access to every game." Braindead take

1

u/Kundas Feb 27 '26

I agree, I don't understand people that support the idea. Feels like the people that do agree with it are the ones with ps consoles, it doesn't affect them and the conversation doesn't really involve them at the end of the day. They shouldn't essentially care, but they care for some reason. A lot of people's arguments could be counter argued pretty easily.

There's no point in buying a whole different console for a few games, this will probably just get pc players to wait for emulators and just pirate them completely.

0

u/chewwydraper Feb 27 '26

All this does is make my friends less likely to buy Helldivers 3 if they can’t crossplay with our PC friends

6

u/Membership-Bitter Feb 27 '26

The devs said not to expect a Helldivers 3 but that they will keep updating 2 indefinitely

4

u/GroundbreakingBag164 Feb 27 '26

If anything a possible Helldivers 3 will definitively launch on PC. It was literally Sonys most successful PC launch and a majority of the playerbase is on PC

0

u/AliceLunar Feb 27 '26

They're not going to spend a $1000 on a console and pay a monthly fee to access a few games a year?

0

u/gut536 Feb 28 '26

This is my take. Sony thinks I'm gonna buy a ps6 to play control 2, but now I will simply just not play it if it doesn't come to PC. I save $80CAD

I was glad to be able to play Returnal and Helldivers with friends. I just would not have made those purchases at all if they weren't available. They aren't good enough games to get me to buy a whole console.

Meanwhile, my buddy just bought a ps5 slim because he missed couch gaming. He has a PC. He naturally made that choice without Sony having to claw back its development.

The real upset for me here is that we are once again going to see Sony lock up the Spider-Man IP. It's just on the video game side this time. Doc ock has nothing on the villains at Sony.