Talk:List of PlayStation 5 games

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List[edit]

Wanted to make a change here, that this list is starting to look like more along the lines of what the Nintendo Switch list when editing. This list should start to go with the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One lists. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 22:00, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you're asking for. You want the PS5 list to match more closely the PS4 and XB1 game list instead of the Switch list? There's not a huge difference between them. — Niche-gamer 23:45, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think it just looks identical to the Switch list. I would think if we had the spacing between TBA like one lower than the other instead of crammed together like the Switch list. But in answer to your question, yes. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 01:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a reason we shouldn't follow the standard set by the Switch list? It's compact and nicely formatted. — Niche-gamer 01:57, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's only two differences at this point: font size, and the addition of the "add-on" column for PS5 here. Font size is a single small edit to the table style so that's easily done when the table gets long enough to need it, right not it doesn't (MOS says you shouldn't really futz with font sizes). Add-on part is hard as we don't know if there will be any for PS5 games yet so that column may ultimately disappear. --Masem (t) 02:13, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The add-on column remains to be seen (personally I'd remove it), but there is no real reason why font sizes should differ here. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 09:16, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just for clarity, the addon column was intended to discourage list articles such as List of Console platform games with camera support and List of Console platform enhanced games etc. During the 360/PS3 generation such articles were created for fun. At least on the PlayStation 4 side I think it worked, although elsewhere we still have pages like List of Xbox One X enhanced games which can probably be merged with the main Xbox One game list. We could give it a few months and review if the column is purposeful or not. — Niche-gamer 13:47, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Switch list was made with the intent of standardizing all future game lists. The only reason why older game lists haven't been updated is because of the large amount of work it would take. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 10:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I made sure that was propagated to the XSX list then as well, so that all three (NS, PS5, and XSX) all share the same format outside this "add-on" column which is not used on the NS case. It will be needed on the XSX case , yet to be seen here for PS5. --Masem (t) 14:04, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If it's needed, then that's fine. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We're still in a "hold" mode for that determination, and I'd rather keep it while the list is developing than to add it when the list is 100s long. Basically, if there is something like "enhanced on PS5" type branding, though i don't see that happening at this point yet. Next few month's we'll know enough that if we need to have it there by the console's launch. --Masem (t) 19:56, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, knowing what we know from Switch page - As long as we have a blue link on the page to a standalone page about the game, that confirms the PS5 release, please don't include a ref so that we don't run into the reference/template overload problem. --Masem (t) 02:51, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon Quest series[edit]

They are in working, unfortunately I do not know at what stage they are pre-production or in production, they are mentioned in reports written in Japanese with unofficial project names. There will be more reliable sources in the coming months or next year. I'm sorry.[1]

No need to apologise. We should probably wait for an official announcement. — Niche-gamer 02:04, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "ドラゴンクエスト12(ドラクエ12)の紹介記事". Retrieved 12 June 2020.

Add-ons[edit]

Neither "free to play" or "cross-platform" are "add ons". --Masem (t) 19:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's obvious we need to discuss the Addon column that was implemented first on List of PlayStation 4 games in 2016 and later List of Xbox One games, and the purpose it serves. The reason for the column, in part, was to discourage the creation of unnecessary list articles in the video game space while providing a means for readers to discover what features and/or accessories a game might support. It wasn't labelled Addons when conceived; it was simply marked by a plus sign (+) and someone edited the heading at a later time and the change was deemed non controversial. The column was used to denote games that support 3D displays, titles that support or necessitate a camera, PlayLink games, PS4 Pro and Xbox One enhanced titles, and games that support cross-platform play.
So perhaps it's time to review its function and what the column should encompass, if anything. I decided recently to denote F2P games, saving the creation of a new article like List of PlayStation 4 free-to-play games or a separate list table like List of Xbox One games (A–L)#Free to play. Simply include free-to-play titles back into the main list, which is where they probably belong, but indicate them rather than creating a separate entity. This was met with the objection "cross play and F2P are not 'add ons'" and both were removed. Okay, if editors feel strongly then we can have a separate table for free-to-play games or whatever. But now there is also objection to denoting cross-play games. So I must ask, why is this objection not applied evenly to all list articles. Why for example is List of Xbox Series X games not subject to the same critical eye? Pro/XB1X, PS5/XSX enhanced games and "Smart Delivery" are not addons. A very strong case can be made that these are pure marketing terms. And I see now this path will lead to even more complexity if/when mid-cycle next-gen consoles arrive.
What we need is consistency. What is marketing, what is genuinely useful. — Niche-gamer 23:35, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That addon column should be about features that the PS5 uniquely offers either via hardware, software, or environment, and not necessary a function of the game.
Free to play games are not a function of platform, nor is cross-platform play - that's strictly a software developers' choice and for all purposes indepenent of the PS5 hardware system. A wholly separate list of F2P, platform neutral (or that is, all in one table, listing platforms supported) is reasonable -- and I'm actually suprised we do not have this. but it makes no sense as an "addon" to the PS5, PS4 or other platform as that's not a platform feature. List of PlayStation 4 free-to-play games is an unnecessary article when instead we should have List of free-to-play video games (which can start from that list, but taking out PS-specific parts, and excluding mobile-only titles). F2P and platform are two separate things and shouldn't be mixed like that. And of course we have List of video games that support cross-platform play already, combining all platforms. Again, that's not a unique feature of the PS5, that's a software choice.
(Adding after posting) What we don't want is that Addon column to be loaded with "software" features that are independent of the platform. The logic of adding F2P or cross-plaform play would also logically lead us to want to indicate mulitplayer games, co-op vs comp games, games with DLC, games with season passes, etc. There's no end when you do not limit "addons" to platform specific features.
Now, games that offer free updates from PS4 to enhanced PS5 versions, that's fine, that's a unique feature. To go to the Xbox Series X, the same logic for games that have free updates from the Xbox One to the XSX, which includes MS's Smart Delivery program. Additionally, MS had this branding for "Optimized for XSX" which , again, unique for the platform. If there's a mid-gen refresh of the PS5 like the PS5 Pro that have games with PS5 Pro enhanced patches, that's an addition. Games with optional VR support, that's an addon. If the camera thing that's coming with the PS5 becomes a key part of any game (beyond just chatting), that's an addon. These are all features specifically around the hardware, not generic features that can apply to any platform, if that makes the reasoning clear. --Masem (t) 01:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And to be clear: the only thing on the PS4 list that is an issue from this angle is the cross-play label. After verifying that 3D mention for native 3D TV displays (which is a PS4 feature) that's fine - its a hardware/software feature of the console. All the others are again unique features of the PS4 hard the games take advantage of, not generic features, if that helps to make the distinction better. --Masem (t) 01:16, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"That addon column should be about features that the PS5 uniquely offers either via hardware, software, or environment, and not necessary a function of the game."
Nowhere have we had a community discussion about what the column should encompass. Who decided the column should document console environment features? What is "unique" about enhanced game patches when multiple consoles have them? Where are these guidelines written? This all feels very arbitrary.
The column was simple in the past. This game supports optional use of a camera. This other game requires a camera to function. Then on September 21, 2017‎ List of Xbox One games began documenting Xbox Series X enhancements like 4K and 60fps. Two days later on September 23, 2017 I began recording Pro enhanced games on List of PlayStation 4 games. I disliked this move because now the column felt like stealth marketing, at a time when Microsoft was promoting enhanced Xbox One X games very hard, even when that was not the intention of the editor who expanded the list to publicize these things. I resisted highlighting PlayStation cross-buy games even after Play Anywhere was added to the Xbox table.
"Now, games that offer free updates from PS4 to enhanced PS5 versions, that's fine, that's a unique feature"
It feels more like marketing. Nor is it unique. Let us recall that at one time these pages had exclusivity columns that were removed for much the same concerns.
"Additionally, MS had this branding for "Optimized for XSX" which, again, unique for the platform."
I cannot support this. I'm sorry. These lists have slowly moved away from their original plain purpose. I honestly thought denoting cross-play games was a helpful idea. I recognize now they need stripping back, recording only peripheral requirement or the column removing altogether. This discussion needs to be broadened further. — Niche-gamer 03:28, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Enhanced for ()" or similar language is not marketing, as long as that is a defined aspect from the platform (that developers must make sure certain features on the improved system are being used." This is not marketing, this is documenting when developers are taking advantage of the improved features which is worth tracking using the manfuacturer's "program name". This is a defining feature of these games, these are not just "go faster" stripes. And that's specific to the platform and thus need to be on these lists.
What we don't want to do is do document non-platform specific features here, which is what cross platform play and free-to-play are. Makes no sense to call those out separately, and that's because you create the slippery slope of what other generic game feature we should list. --Masem (t) 04:13, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Missing from this discussion is a single persuasive reason why we "need" to be documenting one uniquely, platform defining aspect over some other defining aspect, why this applies to some features and not others. The discussion needs to be broadened to allow other viewpoints. — Niche-gamer 12:56, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to see the column fully removed. So what if a game happens to support an add-on? Wikipedia is not a buying guide, and if some device isn't essential to playing the game, it's nothing more than trivia to me. But at the very least, we shouldn't be noting if a game is F2P and/or cross-platform. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 09:02, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I do agree. Whatever good intention the column may have served in the beginning, it has since drifted into murky territory and the arguments for keeping it are not persuasive. — Niche-gamer 12:56, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We definitely shouldn't be tracking just random add-ons, and maybe naming it "addon" is misleading. "Supported System Functionality" might be more appropriate, but though at this point for the PS5, there's very little to be said (that one title has a free upgrade from the PS4 version). It is easier to approach this question from, say, the Xbox side, where things like Smart Delivery and Optimized for Xbox Series X have clear definitions as system functionality facets for games and which reporting has talked about. --Masem (t) 13:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The same multiplatform cross-gen games enhanced and optimized for Xbox Series X are no doubt going to be optimized for PS5 also. Unless exclusive partnership is agreed, the same third-party publishers who offer free upgrades for cross-gen games are no doubt going to extend the offer to PS5 users also. We already see it with Destiny 2. CD Projekt have said they will talk about their upgrade plan for PS5 once Sony talk openly about these things first. If I understand correctly, because Sony have yet to formalize these developments into pure marketing terms like "Smart Delivery", we should delete the column on the PS5 list article (where "there's very little to be said" at the moment), rename the column to something better suiting the catchwords defined by Microsoft, and continue documenting these things on the Xbox Series X page alone. Everything other "functionality facet" is "random" and should be omitted for consideration. That makes zero sense to me. — Niche-gamer 18:56, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Date table sorting[edit]

I propose keeping a shorter date table sorting template for release dates {{dts|2020|Jan|23}} similar to List of PlayStation 4 games and List of Xbox One games. MOS:DATEFORMAT says abbreviated dts is a perfectly acceptable format "where brevity is helpful (refs, tables, infoboxes)" providing the style remains consistent throughout. A shorter format creates more width for the first four columns and improves readability for visitors with small or standard monitors that cannot output at higher resolutions. — Niche-gamer 17:01, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In my experience yes. I have access to three computers and a mobile. The results vary on each. List articles on my oldest laptop are cramped and many entries spill over to three lines. My second laptop is marginally better. The third laptop (belonging to family member) has a wide screen and frames everything nicely. It looks and reads better, with almost every entry confined to a single line. I'm not sure what percentage of readers view Wikipeida on slightly older screens and I'm aware we'll only save around an inch and a half of screen space, but for people like me every little helps. — Niche-gamer 21:41, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Niche-gamer, should we really cater to an issue that the majority of users won't have or notice? Nobody has ever brought this up on the Switch games list, so I'm going to be bold and revert it back. If it's truly an WP:ACCESSIBILITY issue then that's fine, but it can't just be something you prefer to keep from the badly formatted PS4-era lists, not without others agreeing with you anyway. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 09:47, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Nintendo Switch list font size is 10% smaller, and has been since creation, so there must be some general awareness that list articles are unwieldy because we witness the same font size reduction (or greater) across many list articles. That's why nobody has a strong opinion, we have found other ways to compress the display. Hope you don't mind me reverting back for the moment. If you insist or the consensus is otherwise after a few more weeks I will happily accept the result. Honestly I will. This is a legitimate issue and a solution needs to be found. It doesn't take much effort to switch back and forth between date formats. For test purposes I was able to convert the Nintendo Switch page in under 3 minutes using a plain text editor and Replace All function. Look how much better the columns fill the screen. Compare to
September 27, 2014 September 27, 2014 September 27, 2014
Take a little extra time to consider, what is the consequence or harm of implementing abbreviated months in list tables. What do we really lose and what do we gain? If you could try viewing Wikipedia on shorter displays that would also be helpful. — Niche-gamer 12:14, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If I'm to convince people, I should propose the idea on the main project page I guess? — Niche-gamer 16:45, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Niche-gamer, late response but my issue isn't necessarily with it being abbreviated, but rather it being inconsistent with other lists (within the same gen). Nobody had an issue with the Switch list, so doing it here personally annoys me (nitpicking I know, but you can at least see my reasoning). ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I see your reasoning. Consistency is beneficial. List articles have been at variance for years. Examine font size. List of Nintendo Switch games is set at 90%. Until April 2020 List of PlayStation 4 games was at 86%. List of Xbox One games 88%. List of PlayStation 5 games is 100%. List of Xbox Series X games 88%. Editors are vaguely aware there is a problem because they keep reducing font size to maintain table readability. I propose adopting the same font size project wide and improving table space by implementing abbreviated DTS. I will try encourage more feedback by inviting editors on other list articles to comment on the proposal. — Niche-gamer 18:32, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Niche-gamer, I'd support that just for consistency. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:24, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commenting my two cents on the matter, but we should follow accordingly to Nintendo platform lists, if we don't, I think it would be ridiculous to follow different companies in regards to lists. However as I said, I do support condensing references and creating more pages to games and moving references to its respective pages and/or splitting the pages into more lists like the Vita lists. We (or I) think we should keep the Nintendo lists the way it is. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 07:32, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro[reply]

Grand Theft Auto Online[edit]

Can anyone provide clarity on Grand Theft Auto Online. Some sources say it's a standalone release, arriving earlier that the base game. I'm not sure whether its inclusion is merited or not. — Niche-gamer 09:41, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's considered a separate game anyway, isn't it? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 09:48, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • You can't get it separately from GTAV, it just plays like a completely different game. It shouldn't be treated as separate - but I would not see the harm in calling out "GTA V/GTA Online" on the same line. --Masem (t) 13:59, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It was announced that unlike the editions currently out on PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, PlayStation 4, Xbox One and Microsoft Windows that GTA Online will be getting a standalone release separate from GTA V on the PlayStation 5, hence why it has a separate listing here. Poklane 23:41, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Wrong dates in Australasia[edit]

When you hover over the "PAL" heading, it says that this includes Europe and Australasia. However, some games have different release dates across these regions. For example, Demon's Souls was released on 12 November in Australasia but 19 November in Europe. Any thoughts on how to split these out? Behodar (talk) 05:33, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Utilizing this list as a consumer[edit]

I find this list is really great to keep track of new games. The way that I do it is by looking at the revision history to see new edits -- to see if they have new games added. It may seem cumbersome, but I find it hard to find any alternative that is as comprehensive as an ever-updating crowd-sourced list (like this one). However, is there a place people get information from, or was my hunch right that this is the best and quickest database that keeps track of every PS5 game in real-time, incl. future announcements?

The reason I ask is because it is so nice to be able to ignore ALL trailers and promotion and approach new releases objectively, rather than through hype. As a consumer, it really helps you find the best games that you will actually resonate with. For example, when a new game is added here, it shows up as plain-text (not as a trailer or hyped 5 star review.) If anyone knows a better alternative to essentially refreshing revision history for new edits for new games, let me/everyone know! 2601:988:180:1010:59B3:CFBE:D0C5:8713 (talk) 22:59, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Make an account and add this article to your Watchlist. You'll still have to check your watchlist, but it'll show you when this page has been edited. -- ferret (talk) 00:32, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PlayStation VR2 games are excluded - why?[edit]

Original PSVR games are included in the list of PS4 games, so why wouldn't it be the same here? There is also a dedicated list of games for the original PSVR, but no such list for PSVR2. What is the reason for the exclusion? Nathendo64 (talk) 23:59, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

we don't know 2601:640:C200:2340:94BF:4092:9D16:396 (talk) 16:30, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Planet Zoo: Console Edition[edit]

Can someone add Planet Zoo: Console Edition it releases March 26th 2024 2600:1009:B1C5:8613:796A:EE68:5E8C:B3BF (talk) 06:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would add it but I don’t know how 2600:1009:B17F:EA0F:AC99:E8D4:B545:5B64 (talk) 06:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done 2600:1009:B17F:4867:68CF:40DC:7EC5:B131 (talk) 06:43, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Treasures of the Aegean" is missing[edit]

"Treasures of the Aegean" is missing 2A02:8428:634:1701:9DE2:1E6B:3B3C:167D (talk) 16:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_PlayStation_5_games&oldid=1208366411"