Bloodborne is never going to be officially ported it's a pipe dream at this point.
They even had a fully playable basic port at one time.
They even had a fully playable basic port at one time.
Sucks to be you then.Sony games I don't really care about playing and probably never will.
Never gonna happen. SadlyNow it they ever release Days Gone 2 I'll be happy.
Not very surprising or exciting though. I always figured Ragnarok was a sure bet to get ported.Some good news at least.
What? I'm not sure I understand.It's probably just a typo like JP instead of JO ...
What I posted yesterday: you can see the list of countries by their abberviations. JO must be Jordan, and JP stands for Japan.What? I'm not sure I understand.
Regardless, it's absolutely dysfunctional. They literally sold their previous game (Helldivers 2), for months, in countries they knew they didn't have PSN support.
And they knew they would eventually try to force PSN linking. I don't know what you call that if not dysfunctional.
Oh, thanks.Redglyph said:What I posted yesterday: you can see the list of countries by their abberviations. JO must be Jordan, and JP stands for Japan.
From what I know developers/publishers pretty much have full control over their own developer/publisher pages and internals, for the games they sell on Steam. Valve built the platform over time to allow most of it to be self-servicing; all but the most exceptional cases probably. There's really no other way Valve could handle that huge amount of customer support, by needing to manually intervene in most cases.For all we know, it could be a mistake on Valve's end.
I won't contradict you there.Anyway, damage has been done. And it doesn't look like it's stopping. Fucking Sony. One step forward, two steps back.
I have no idea. Don't you think their story is true, that they just want to be in control of who's on the servers and ban them if it's necessary?I hope this whole debacle doesn't also have a chilling effect on them putting a lot of work into selling future PS games on Steam. You'd think they think of the money foremost, but apparently not? Or are they really making that much money from just artificially inflating their PSN numbers that they really need to push this?
For the multiplayer games or parts, sure. I can believe that.I have no idea. Don't you think their story is true, that they just want to be in control of who's on the servers and ban them if it's necessary?
Who knows anyway, Japanese think differently than we do.
I thought you didn't need a PSN account for the single-player part?For the multiplayer games or parts, sure. I can believe that.
But for games that are purely singleplayer or the parts that you don't even need to be online (that's effectively most of the PS games out there; I've had a PS3, PS4 and PS5, and only with PS5 did I even connect the console to the internet and a PSN account. Until then I simply played the games in the state they were on disc, without even connecting to the internet. Even the firmware updates for the console I got off of the physical game discs)
It's very confusing. The developers of Ghost of Tsushima said you don't need an account for the singleplayer part.I thought you didn't need a PSN account for the single-player part?
I suppose they don't want to bother making an SP-only version of the game, which is understandable enough because they'd need to adjust the price and would still be yelled at because players can't multiplay.It's very confusing. The developers of Ghost of Tsushima said you don't need an account for the singleplayer part.
But then Sony went on to ban selling the game entirely (even the parts that theoretically shouldn't need PSN) in countries that they don't support PSN for. So effectively, best case scenario, you still can't buy it in non-PSN countries, but the singleplayer parts don't require a PSN account.
The effect of which is sort of the same.
But in those same countries where they don't support PSN you can still buy a PS console and play singleplayer games/content.