I'm not sure what the future holds in regards to whether they will try to pursue this again or not, I certainly hope they won't. This information doesn't change anything that is going on right now.

Here is the reason I posted it, I think it will help: There were people online saying that Valve may be the ones who delisted HD2 to protect themselves legally, instead of sony being the one's who delisted it. This is primary source evidence that it was in fact Sony who delisted it, not Valve.

We can try to draw conclusions from it and I think it is very strange that Sony hasn't re-enabled purchasing in these countries now that the PSN requirement has dropped, companies typically try to sell products to as wide of an audience as possible.

I know that doesn't directly answer your question but unfortunately I think only time will tell.

Up until this point I personally haven't seen Valve or Steam make direct comments as to who exactly made this choice. I may have just missed it but I always look for something directly from the company. I also don't have knowledge on how steam pushes changes, I think if you have intimate knowledge on that it was obvious? This is also just pulled from a post on Reddit, so it could also be 100% bullshit. To me though this was the first thing I saw that allowed me to start forming an opinion to your above question, without giving Sony the benefit of the doubt. I hate to give that to Sony because I hate what Sony did, but for arguments sake I personally don't ignore things like that.

These are my reasons for sharing.

[–] wccrawford@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They delisted them before they announced that they wouldn't require accounts after all.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago (2 children)

So then why not relist them and sell your game on a bigger market? The answer is probably because they will try again.

[–] wccrawford@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Perhaps. Or perhaps they're a giant behemoth where 1 hand doesn't know what the other is doing, and the person with the authority for this hasn't bothered.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I don't buy that.. I would have when this just started.. just a stupid decision made by an MBA that only thinks of his MAU and DAU (Monthly /Daily Active Users) metrics for the playstation network.

But once shit hit the fan, some big shot corpo started making central decisions from the comfort of his volcano base while petting his white cat.

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago

I think the answer is because they don't believe they need that market, they were obviously okay with losing that market share in the first place due to the fact that they put the requirement in there. As their announcements have said, requiring a PSN account is something that gives them more control over abuse (and ofc data) and allowing more players that are in countries where they are not currently allowed to have those accounts are counterproductive to what they are currently driving for

I'm not surprised they didn't reverse the region locks they believe it's something for the best and that's not something that the consumer is going to be able to change, regardless of the reviews or protest, worst case scenario for them is they just go back to being fully console exclusive if the PR pressure gets too bad