Talk:List of PlayStation 4 games/Archive 1

EverQuest Next
EverQuest Next has been added to this article multiple times without any citation. Thus far, I cannot find any reliable source which explicitly and officially confirms EverQuest Next for the PlayStation 4. Please review the Wikipedia Introduction to Referencing prior to adding it to the list again. EverQuest Next should only be added when and if a confirmation is made by a reputable source. Tazzik Salarian (talk) 21:48, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for visiting the talk page, 24.131.55.221, although I am unsure as to why you later deleted your comment. The official word in the article you cited is: “We need to make sure that [EverQuest Next is] a kickass game on PC before we do anything else. We’re going to nail down all our questions and design and everything like that so that it’s a really good game. Then we’ll talk about other platforms." Unfortunately, this does not constitute an announcement or a confirmation. The article's author even states that EverQuest Next "may eventually make its way onto PS4" (Emphasis added). If/when we receive explicit and official confirmation, we can add EverQuest Next to the article. Until then, it's just speculation. Tazzik Salarian (talk) 05:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Extras section
Added this section instead of adding some of these games to the list as even though the information is there, I don't think they are all 100%, kind of like with EverQuest Next, keeps getting added and removed from the list, I have also not been able to find anything that confirms Dragon's Prophet coming to PS4 (though I have found sources saying there is a chance) much like EverQuest Next but Dragon's Prophet is still on the list, I assume the person who added that game prob knows something we don't so I did not remove it.

If you do not think this should be here, let me know and I will remove it or you could always remove it yourself, just add the official/confirmed games to the list first.

I know I should put this in Alphabetical order, will edit it later if not removed. Zer0n9ne (talk) 22:16, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Remember folks wikipedia relies on reliable sources for all information
Remember folks wikipedia relies on reliable sources for all information and the 'extras' section on this page appears to fail said requirement. if you can't substantiate the game with a reliable source then is does not belong on this page. I will remove ALL games without sources. => Spudgfsh  ( Text Me! ) 00:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Hohokum Edit
The source cited wasn't giving a more precise date than "2014". I googled around and wasn't able to find anything confirming that the game would be available at launch. Changed the date. If any of you find the actual date, please cite it! Shintenpu (talk) 14:02, 29 October 2013 (EST)

New Game Announcements
Sorry I don't know how to work with the grid formatting, but I thought I'd share some updates and announcements. If someone else could please insert these into the list, that would be great. This message can be deleted afterwards. Thanks.

http://www.videogamer.com/ps4/kuf2/news/kingdom_under_fire_2_confirmed_for_ps4.html http://www.gameshot.net/common/con_view.php?code=GA5281c426f28bc Kingdom Under Fire 2 for PS4 and PC

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2013/11/12/december-2013-shadow-of-mordor-67498.aspx Lord of the Rings: Shadow of Mordor for PS4, PS3, XB1, 360, and PC

http://www.shacknews.com/article/81936/backgammon-blitz-announced-for-ps4-ps3-and-vita Backgammon Blitz for PS4, PS3, and PSVita

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/blog/11502590/prepare-for-ultimate-evil-on-playstation%C2%AE-4-11-8-2013 Diablo 3: Ultimate Evil Edition (PS4 version seems to have a new subtitle)

72.235.140.136 (talk) 03:51, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Contrast on Xbox 360
Contrast is listed as a console exclusive, but it's available as an Xbox Live Arcade title for Xbox 360. Does it count as a console exclusive because the 360 is previous gen, or is this an error? I'd say the 360 is a "competing console". --Spug (talk) 20:07, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and changed it to "No". --Spug (talk) 19:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh hang on, it actually says "No = Available to more than one console of this console generation". Sorry for the brainfart. Reverting my own edit. --Spug (talk) 19:51, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Included 'Playable' to the wiki
If I was a Playstation 4 customers. And I went to a Wikipedia I love to know what is ready to buy at this instance. Also with a new Console release writing 180 games isn't all togather true. As more then 80% of those games is still in development and has not yet been released.

Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.248.248.253 (talk) 20:53, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Also when you sort on date it's messy. A distiction between released and to be released should definitely be made. --85.115.33.180 (talk) 22:06, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Chronological Order
Could we replace "2014" by "TBA 2014" for example so that games that are already released appear before games that have yet to be released when ordering by date? Is there a way to do this easily? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.113.30.50 (talk) 21:30, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * OK so I did it myself by doing a find-replace all in Word. I feel it is much easier to see which games are coming soon now. I used "20XX" when the year was unknown (Mega Man-style). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.113.30.50 (talk) 16:05, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I've reverted it, it adds to much clutter to the list, having TBA 2018 everywhere makes it harder to find the actual dates for other entries. Will try to find a way to solve sort order problem with a different method. - X201 (talk) 17:13, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Could we use the format YYYY-MM-DD allowed by the Wikipedia Manual of Style and replace the day and month by placeholders (such as ??) when they are undetermined? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.113.30.50 (talk) 23:37, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Dust 514
Why is the "Exclusive" status for this game "Yes"? It is currently on PS3 and a PS4 version is not even confirmed (not in the given reference either). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlasaj (talk • contribs) 06:19, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

It seems to have been removed. I don't believe Dust 514 will be making it's way to PS4, so it's good that it's removed for now. WhereAmI (talk) 22:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Project Morpheus
How are we tackling these titles? Should we be creating a seperate list page all together for the games confirmed for project morpheus, or should we add another column to the list on this page, much like the Xbox One list mentions if Kinect is required or not. Possibly, we could have a Morpheus column where a value of "Yes" donates Morpheus being required, "Support" donates that there is Morpheus support for the title, but is also playable via regular means on PS4, and "No" donates that the title is free of Morpheus support altogether. Thoughts? Mordecairule 13:20, 13 May 2014 (UTC)


 * It's pretty early. I think much later on when there are a large number of games it'd be worthwhile to do another column, provided that's the way things go, but until then the project page should keep the list. WhereAmI (talk) 00:52, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

DayZ
I just noticed that DayZ no longer appears on the playstation 4 game list. Does anyone know why it was removed? Should it be put back in? I looked around at the revision history, seems that the following edit 17:16, 26 October 2013‎ Ral539(talk | contribs)‎. . (75,074 bytes) (-512)‎. .(→‎PlayStation 4 games) was done by Ral539 for no other reason than to remove the DayZ entry. I think it should be considered to be vandalism, as there was no apparent reason DayZ was removed, and there are articles on the net stating sonys interest in having dayz on ps4, and ceator/designer Dean Hall of Bohemia Interactive pubicly expressed interest in developing dayz for ps4 http://www.joystiq.com/2013/06/16/dayz-creator-considering-ps4-xbox-one-after-pc-has-an-early-fa/ http://www.joystiq.com/2013/04/02/hall-dayz-console-port-discussed-with-sony-wait-and-see/ Davnoctu (talk) 17:42, 18 December 2013 (UTC)


 * This list is for titles planned for release. If you read the sources, Dean Hall describes a console release as likely and possible, but never explicitly says 'We will release on PS4' and they aren't thinking of working on any console port until after the full PC version is out. Samwalton9 (talk) 17:22, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

O ok Mr Walton, thanks for explaining. I guess it will be a while before DayZ can re returned here, as they only just released an alpha for pc. Sorry for the interruption, I just assumed that DayZ had been removed without just cause as it had been up there for quite a while and was removed by itself without any explanation.Davnoctu (talk) 17:42, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That's fair and you did the right thing by posting on the talk page about it :) Samwalton9 (talk) 17:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello an update from August 2014 here. Day Z has been officially confirmed at Gamescon and should be re-added to the list. I have went ahead and done so. WhereAmI (talk) 22:43, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed Games section
I don't believe the Confirmed Games section should be there. It's listing confirmed games existence but no platform announcements yet. That's not what this list is for. I would like to remove this section. WhereAmI (talk) 04:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * One thing I found to back up deleting it is What_Wikipedia_is_not. Relevant text: " Speculation and rumor, even from reliable sources, are not appropriate encyclopedic content." "Confirmed" is being used as speculation or assumed. This is a list of PlayStation 4 games, not list of games that will probably be on PlayStation 4. I'm going to remove this section unless people can come up with a good reason to show it's not violating Wikipedia guidelines. --WhereAmI (talk) 17:49, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I haven't seen any contributions from anyone else. I'll be removing the section in the near future unless people have some good objections. WhereAmI (talk) 23:15, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * No one has contributed to the discussion in 13 days. I'm removing it since I do believe it violates What_Wikipedia_is_not. It's either on the PS4 or it's not. --WhereAmI (talk) 15:32, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

User keeps removing Infamous First Light
A user keeps removing Infamous First Light. I've reverted it a few times now and have went to the Edit Warring page and reported the user (I should have opened a discussion here first though). This was after I've warned them a few times on their talk page. The user hasn't explained why or contacted me back. WhereAmI (talk) 02:49, 15 August 2014 (UTC)


 * User was blocked. If they come back, I think opening another case on Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring would result in a more long term ban. WhereAmI (talk) 22:29, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
 * User came back. I've reported already. The user made a edit summary, instead of coming here, calling the game "the same as second son." The user is unaware that First Light is standalone, I believe. Source. WhereAmI (talk) 23:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The user was blocked again for 48 hours. We'll see if they come back once again... WhereAmI (talk) 23:37, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I believe the same user to be engaging in Wikipedia: Sock Puppetry so I have asked for and gotten protection on this page. I know some of you IP users have made great edits, please consider creating an account, making edit requests, or waiting until the protection is removed. --WhereAmI (talk) 15:34, 20 August 2014 (UTC)


 * User was blocked again and their confirmed 2 accounts were banned as sockpuppets. See my history for sockpuppet investigation if they come back. --WhereAmI (talk) 06:06, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Why so many games TBA and unreleased?
Is there a way this could be segregated or at least a filter?

Makes Wikipedia look like Amazon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.19.90.61 (talk) 14:13, 19 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Date sorting has been talked about on here before, I spent days trying to find a way to do it, but, due to the template that's used for the dates, its just not possible. The only other way would be to split the TBA stuff into separate tables. - X201 (talk) 14:48, 19 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Making seperate tables for released and un-released might not be such a bad idea. Would be a lot more beneficial to people to know exactly which titles are available now, rather than just listing a number saying "60 titles available" then leaving that person to do all the guess work. --Mordecairule 12:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * It would be easier to just add one more column for game status. Then update manually. You'd have to move games from one table to another manually too. This way would save space. GMRE (talk) 18:55, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

APB Reloaded
APB reloaded was just confirmed for PS4, non exclusive. Also the counters at the top of the page need updating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.197.121.161 (talk) 13:18, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Clean up
Please stop your cleanup. I agree that this needs a clean up, but just putting a plain link to the PSN Store and expecting readers to search for the info themselves isn't on. Please revert as this needs proper references. - X201 (talk) 21:02, 6 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm following the precedent set by other game list articles. Take List of Wii games or List of Xbox 360 games for example. A full reference list would be unwieldy, so editors either use multipurpose ids when available or a piped link so the information can be verified by clicking through to the main game article. I don't intend to replace any references for games with future release dates or timed exclusives; only titles that are already available and not likely to be challenged (e.g. Far Cry, Driveclub, Knack). Playstation.com is heavily referenced in this article. It's considered a reliable source by WP:VG/RS. In one sense, providing PlayStation Store as a verifiable reference is not much different than providing the title of a book. People are required to obtain the book and open it. In this case, if someone seriously questions the existence of, say, FIFA 2014 on PS4, we have provided them a means by which they can verify its accuracy. Plus, the page no longer crawls to a halt because it's overburdened with references, as it does on my laptop :) Does that sound reasonable? — TPX 00:06, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Number of columns
Can we reach agreement as to the number of columns we should include on the list. The following information is considered indispensable and most often repeated:

Title | Genre(s) | Developer(s) | Publisher(s) | Exclusive | Europe | Japan | North America | Reference

An anon editor wishes to include a 'Game engine' column, but the information does not strike me as essential detail (people can discover more information about a game's development, including 'game engine', in the article info box). Non essential columns also have the unfortunate affect of narrowing and squishing the more informative ones. It would be nice to hear from other editors. — TPX 21:32, 5 March 2015 (UTC)


 * "Game engine" is essentially superfluous information that is non-essential, and ideally should not have its own column within the table. While things such as titles, developers, genres, etc. are crucial for a reader's understanding of a game, the game engine is not, and only serves as trivia if it's ever added to this page. -- benlisquare T•C•E 11:21, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Why is no man's sky listed as not exclusive?
All of the details about this game point to this game being, at the very least, a timed exclusive since it will be debuting on the Ps4 and no other platform. Why then is it listed as absolutely not exclusive?Osh33m (talk) 02:14, 11 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I've changed it to Console since it's Windows/PS4. I did not update the numbers though, I plan on re-doing those within a week to ensure it's actually up to date.WhereAmI (talk) 00:56, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Just a note here: Someone changed it to Timed. I'm not sure if that's more appropriate than Console, but once the Windows version hits I'll change it back to Console provided Xbone/WiiU/WiiUNext versions aren't announced.--WhereAmI (talk) 22:58, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Lego Dimensions North America Release Date
I think that the release date for Lego Dimensions in NA should be changed from September 27, 2015 to September 29, 2015. September 27th is a Sunday, and I do not think that the game would be released on any day other than a Tuesday or Friday. Wanted to post here to get the "All clear" before changing it myself. Please let me know. -SkyHookio — Preceding unsigned comment added by SkyHookio (talk • contribs) 19:06, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't, until we can get a published source that says so, games being released on a Sunday although rarer than on a Tuesday, have been known to happen. Nintendo games are the most prominent example of this trend, but I'm pretty sure it's not an exclusive thing. --Deathawk (talk) 02:37, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Can We Get a Recheck on the Count
Someone put the Lego Dimensions exclusive as "Console" as oppesed to not exclusive and I changed it back and undid one number for the console exclusive numbers but I'm not entirely sure that's right. In fact when including the Free-to-Play games it looks like the number of console exclusives is a little over one hundred. Could someone check on this? --Deathawk (talk) 02:37, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Identifying cross-play and virtual reality supported titles
I propose adding 1 extra column to our table, to distinguish cross-play and virtual reality supported titles. This can be accomplished by adopting a shorter date time sorting format  in order to accommodate additional information. Below is how the new table will appear:

Feedback is welcome. — TPX 14:51, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If there are no objections, I will add this extra column over the weekend. — TPX 20:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I REALLY like this addition here. Makes it really easy for any consumer to check out finer details. Since you spear headed this change, I would figure I would ask here...Should we similarly adopt the same function on the Xbox One table to show Kinect games, and cross-buy games since cross-buy/play will be ramping up with Windows 10(eg Killer Instinct, Gears of War, Fable Legends, ect)? Mordecairule 16:47, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It would be nice if we adopted a common standard across all our Wikipedia game lists. There is a considerable amount of divergence, with different lists prioritising dissimilar things (i.e. Achievement/Trophy support, etc). Why not Metacritic scores? I added one additional column to this article. That has limitations. So a problem may arise when you have a cross-buy title that is also cross-play, and uses a peripheral. So three additional columns would be preferable, but now the table begins to look compressed again. I also decided to omit cross-buy titles (for now) because there is such a large number of them. Try experimenting and see what works. — TPX 17:29, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * A column for Metacritic scores would not be very useful for 90% of the Japanese games that will never ever see the light of day in the west. Metacritic does not cover Japanese exclusives, which spans a significant portion of the libraries across the various PlayStation consoles. Also, such an implementation would become easily outdated, since Metacritic scores continuously change within the first month or two of release, and readers are already able to sort lists of games by Metacritic score on the Metacritic website anyway, which would make it redundant on Wikipedia. Also, consider the issues of Feature creep, WP:ACCESS and WP:NOT; these pages aren't supposed to be perfect "catch-alls" that cover everything. Adding more columns to the table can potentially cause a bit of tight squeezing, especially if a reader is accessing the page on a mobile device or an old computer with a low res display. -- benlisquare T•C•E 21:31, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

A guide to abbreviations used by Sony Computer Entertainment Asia
In press releases by SCE Asia, they use abbreviations to denote software releases. Here is a summary of what they mean: This is the general format used by pages published on asia.playstation.com and related websites. -- benlisquare T•C•E 05:38, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * SC: Simplified Chinese, i.e. the game will be released in mainland China
 * TC: Traditional Chinese, i.e. the game will be released in Taiwan and Hong Kong
 * KR: The game will be released in South Korea
 * EN: The game will be released throughout Asia in English

Date format.
I was wondering if we would allow the full date format to the list instead of shortening them. And this applies to List of Wii Games, if that could be fixed. Thanks. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 23:01, 7 November 2015 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro


 * It's not broken.  is a perfectly valid abbreviated form (see Template:Dts). It was adopted here, and elsewhere, in order to accommodate additional information within the table.  — TPX 00:29, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Titles exclusive to South Korea
In case anyone wants to add more games to the list, here is a list of games developed for the PS4 by South Korean developers. Some of these may potentially remain unreleased outside of Korea. -- benlisquare T•C•E 06:30, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed alteration to exclusivity table
On PlayStation 4 and Xbox One, a title can be inversely classified as console exclusive providing it has not been released on a competing 8th generation system. The exact wording of  says "Available to more than one console of this console generation". But on PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, a title is only to be considered exclusive if not found on any other console period. I propose we adopt the PS3/360 criteria of grading titles, otherwise games such as Bastion, Ultra Street Fighter IV and a host of old Arcade Classics like Bomb Jack can be marked as PS4 console exclusive, even though the same titles can be found on a multitude of older home consoles. — TPX 10:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ makes sense. That's the definition of exclusive right? 65.184.233.49 (talk) 21:24, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

If there is no objection, I will alter the text of the exclusivity table from  to. — TPX 01:05, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello! New here and have a few questions
Edit** I also now feel this is posted in the wrong location.... if it is, feel free to point me at the right place and I'll happily delete this. Thanks again!

I started a project, and was using the PS4 Games list for reference. I quickly found several games information to be incorrect, so I decided to try my hand at editing it. For the most part I have only edited dates, and or exclusivity listings. So I have a few questions. Several games have yet to be added from recent events, and I would like to add those. I have already added 100 Foot Robot Golf, and Golem, and the list looks good. Firstly, how do I add a source as confirmation my information is correct (I'm assuming so it can be moderated), and secondly. Does the counter at the top automatically change when the lists are? Both games I added are PS4 Platform exclusives, and I didn't think to check the number, currently at 96, before making the edits. I also didn't think to look at it before changing some of the exclusive tags. I believe I changed 2 or 3 games from console exclusive to no. If there isn't an easy way to fix it, I guess I can do it the hard way, and just count outright, but it would be nice if there was some algorithm for it. Thank you much. I hope to continue to help make this list as accurate as possible! Spenok (talk) 20:52, 23 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Feel free to supply missing information. Be bold. The game count must be updated by hand at the top of the page. — TPX 06:20, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Cross platofmr functionality
not all of the games with purple are cross-PLAY, some of them just have cross-functions. for instance, Digimon Story: Cyber Sleuth has cross save but because purple means cross platform multiplayer, the message is that this game has crossplay but that is false. it has cross-platform functionality. cross play is a cross platform functionality but not all cross platform functionality is just cross play Osh33m (talk) 03:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks. The title in question was updated as not having cross-platform multiplayer. Entries with outdated or false information have since been corrected and cross-platform multiplayer sourcing improved. If you spot any further errors go right ahead and improve them or identify them here so they can be resolved. — TPX 09:34, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Confusion surrounding the implementation of exclusivity
Just because a game's timed exclusivity period ends doesn't change the fact that it was once an exclusive. If we are going to denote timed exclusives, they should stay denoted, as that lets the reader know that although it either IS or WAS exclusive, it isn't permanent. Osh33m (talk) 15:04, 21 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The exclusivity table is to help inform the reader regarding a title's current status and release date. Thus, on List of PlayStation 4 games Rocket League is listed as a 'timed' exclusive until the day it releases on Xbox One, at which point the entry is updated from 'timed' to multiplatform. Similarly, Rise of the Tomb Raider is marked on List of Xbox One games as a timed exclusive until the day it releases on PS4. Continuing to define a title as 'timed' or 'console' exclusive, long after the timed exclusivity period has expired, only serves to confuse people. The table is meant to be informative and is amended on a regular basis to reflect a game's current availability -- not merely to preserve for eternity some obsolete understanding that ceases to be relevant.  — TPX 16:18, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Listing the game as multiplatform is what will give the wrong message because people will think it was never exclusive in the first place.
 * Timed: Confirmed as exclusive for a certain period of time, but will become available on competing platforms later <---this statement still applies to the Ps4 version of rocket league. it was confirmed exclusive for half a year and then was made available on xbone. Osh33m (talk) 21:28, 21 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Examine briefly the history tab on both PS4 and Xbox One list articles and you will discover many different editors updating the article to modify the status of individual entries (e.g. here, here, here, here, here and here). This reflects the latest information and keeps the list up-to-date.


 * Now ask yourself the following question: What is the purpose of continuing to denote Quantum Break as a full Xbox One exclusive when the game has now been confirmed for PC? Or continuing to list Rocket League as a PS4 console exclusive after the exlusivty period has expired?


 * If you would like editors to adopt and abide by a different set of rules, then you should submit a proposal for acceptance or rejection. — TPX 07:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Osh33m, I want to let you know that you are not alone, we've had this same discussion about this for Wii U (You can see for yourself: this discussion) and TPX is the same opponent here and there. I support using "Timed" to denote games that had this status once in the past. Rukario -sama  ^ㅈ^ -(...)  06:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


 * As I explained in that prior discussion, the Wii list articles apply a unique set of rules not shared elsewhere. List of PlayStation 4 games, List of Xbox One games, List of video game exclusives (seventh generation) and List of video game exclusives (eighth generation) are updated to reflect a title's current status. This helps to explain why users who regularly edit List of Wii U software visit this page applying a different standard at odds with normal practice.
 * I also suggested to you in that prior discussion that if you want to see a resolution to the matter, then we should take the issue to WT:VG to find a universally accepted approach. A sensible suggestion, no? — TPX 12:28, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Yeah sorry I'd bring this subject to WT:VG but wasn't in mood to do it myself... I've seen some editors removed the Timed status from some Wii U games in the table but I let it go. The Timed status could be about to reflect game's current status, and that's all thanks to the description in the exclusivity legend list. It can't be that hard to change or even outright remove its description so it won't ask for more work from us (as in cleaning up the Timed status from the table where some games should no longer have it). Rukario -sama   ^ㅈ^ -(...)  22:52, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

SCE vs SIE
Sony Computer Entertainment was renamed Sony Interactive Entertainment, effective April 1, 2016. Now, user ThePowerofX quickly renamed the company in all its entries in the list, potentially violating WP:V. Instead, we should keep the old name in the table for titles published before April 1 and use the new name for everything after that date - the same way we do with renamings of developer studios, other publishers, etc. InflatableSupertrooper (talk) 07:14, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what is the correct way to proceed. Games produced and maintained by Sony Online Entertainment were updated to Daybreak Game Company by various different editors. Nobody objected. On the main Sony Interactive Entertainment page, we find statements such as "As of March 31, 2015, the company [SIE] has sold more than 458 million consoles worldwide", even though SCE were responsible for the sales, not SIE.


 * It we are attributing production and credit in a manner respective of past events, then several editors should be informed. Perhaps we should have this discussion on Sony Interactive Entertainment and invite broader input? — TPX 08:39, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure, I don't mind that. I don't know if there was a consensus reached about this earlier, but re-visioning something that is clearly a matter of historical record (and publishing records certainly are) then we are in danger of going against WP:V. It makes sense to ignore the name change in discussing the operations of the company, as it is pretty much the same entity - but names of publishers and development studios should always stay the way they were known at the time of publication, just like we do with books, newspapers, films, etc. InflatableSupertrooper (talk) 07:06, 4 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I've reverted my edits but retained SIE for all future releases. — TPX 20:29, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Merge Free-to-play games into the main list?
Wow, TPX's edit summary are loaded with his negative opinions, but has started this discussion as asked so. I guess the broken redirect is the only real reason he's having right now. On the pros side, the games can be sorted along with other games in the same table. There are several other pros with it merged, like Template:Table row counter which is currently used in List of Wii U software.

I have a second question. Is it relevant for Wikipedia to label which game is free-to-play? Rukario -sama  ^ㅈ^ -(...)  12:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * It's good that we are discussing the matter instead of edit warring. Let me express a number of points. Free-to-play titles do not require any kind of subscription to access online play. This distinction is notable enough to warrant a sub table. More gamers are without PlayStation Plus than members. The table allows readers to find the information they search for quickly and easily.


 * When I proposed the ninth column on talk last year, it was part of an effort to make the table appear more ordered and less constricted. Both are equally important. Adopting a shorter time/date format and reducing the font-size helped to a degree, but since that period the amount information has grown again and the columns are beginning to look compressed and squashed again. This has a knock-on effect to the whole table.


 * There is precedent for including more than one table. See List of PlayStation 3 games for example. — TPX 14:07, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Specifically, I'm not sure if this goes against the 8th in WP:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines unless they're there for encyclopedic reasons. Notable to the players, sure, but how are they relevant to Wikipedia? If not, it's probably not ideal to have a dedicated table for them. I'll let them slide if they're merged into the list. My real reason is the Free-to-Play table is what breaks the sorting table as noted in the last sentence in WP:Splitting. Rukario -sama   ^ㅈ^ -(...)  19:58, 3 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The eight bullet point (Wikipedia is not a Sales catalog) does not apply to this discussion because the purchase cost of each item is not listed on the page. WP:SPLITOUT has no bearing on this topic either. I'm not sure why having two distinct tables is bothering you so much. As I said previously, this approach makes it helpful for visitors to find pertinent information quickly and easily, plus two discrete tables on the same page has precedent in other list articles. — TPX 08:58, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The game missing from the main table? This is what bothers me. Surely there is a reason behind that notes in size split suggestion. Even though this list shouldn't have to do with size split as it implies but I'm just using common sense here. Free-to-Play games is missing from the main table. Free-to-play also suggested they're "free" in cost which I think is still not allowed because of Wikipedia policy regarding pricing of a product. Are these points still not enough to merge tables back together? Your only point is to let players find free-to-play game easier? This can be done when the player sort the "+" column as long as I let them slide. Then you have to worry about table width? You can't be serious right? Rukario -sama   ^ㅈ^ -(...)  18:42, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The article guideline is referring to listing the actual purchase cost of games, products and subscriptions. It is inappropriate to provide a sum figure next to each title (e.g. $59.99)."Exceptions are generally made for inclusion of the manufacturer's retail price of standardized game hardware and devices, such as game consoles, on articles about that hardware or comparisons with other hardware, a practice in line with other physical product articles on Wikipedia."


 * Readability, the quality that makes things easy to understand, is very important. I pondered for a considerable amount of time before proposing the ninth table column, searching for ways to convey helpful information without exceeding one-hundred percent table width. If you examine the ninth column and a game such as Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn, you can already see that there is a limited amount of space before everything becomes constricted. We must also consider that PlayStation 4 and Xbox One cross-platform multiplayer is real possibility, which we must provide additional space for. The current order is straightforward and logical.


 * Another point to consider. It's conceivable, as this page continues to expand, that we may need to split the list up into separate pages - one page for each letter of the alphabet. See List of Amiga games, List of PC games, Index of DOS games for examples. Not this year perhaps, but in the near future. — TPX 20:19, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The main table is supposed to be comprehensive. No game should be omitted from it, as free-to-play games are fully PlayStation 4 games. At the same time, a different list article can be created for these games while also keeping them in the main table. Ozdarka (talk) 10:09, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


 * We could always put it to the vote: Keep the existing format (which is seen elsewhere) or split them off to a separate article, then wait a few weeks for feedback. — TPX 18:07, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


 * WT:VG Didn't think that F2P not only mean free in cost comparison. I still want them to go back into the main table though. I'll vote any way to make it possible. F2P into the "+" column or split into own article. Rukario -sama   ^ㅈ^ -(...)  20:28, 26 June 2016 (UTC)


 * If users vote to merge them, instead of denoting each F2P game in the + column, I would prefer to take Ozdarka's suggestion and both merge and have a second list article. The article could be named List of free-to-play PlayStation games to incorporate PS3, PS4 and Vita titles. — TPX 20:47, 26 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree with this new article name and we can list all F2P games from all PlayStation gens into each table respectively. What is your current position on this? Since you've said that if user vote to merge them, I assumed you're still on the opposition side of any new changes made toward F2P games, even copying them back into the main list, if there's not enough votes. Rukario -sama   ^ㅈ^ -(...)  00:08, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Exclusivity legend
Rukario-sama, you make plenty of good contributions across the project, but sometimes you are a little hasty to implement large-scale changes that have not been discussed adequately. I see no reason why we can't come to an agreement. But first, we need to consider a range of colors schemes that users might consider best. We must also drop a small note on various list articles inviting editors to participate in the discussion. — TPX 12:39, 29 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I haven't yet to hear what position are you on about the current color set (and text, column order/width also). Rukario -sama   ^ㅈ^ -(...)  07:28, 30 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm a proponent of the current, longstanding color set. It consists of 4 basic colors and keeps things simple. Any future discussion should include the present scheme as a possible option. A parallel discussion should focus on where precisely in the chart the exclusivity status should appear. For me, the title of the game should always come first. — TPX 19:11, 30 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Oh, speaking of, the exclusivity column went far to the left was because originally I have tried to give title cells in color as indication in one of exclusive types, but ended up as own cells so they can be sorted. The exclusive column being first before the title actually looks alright as long as it does not provide any text. Rukario -sama   ^ㅈ^ -(...)  19:44, 30 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Do we include text or not. These are the sort of things that need to be first discussed, before making sweeping changes. We must also notify other list article talk pages, inviting editors to share their opinion on what scheme they consider most suitable. In time, a consensus should emerge. — TPX 20:18, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Retail vs. Download
Shouldn't we make a split between games that are sold at retail and games that will be for digital download only? That's the way it's been done on every other console game list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.58.87 (talk) 19:42, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Three years later and it still hasn't been done. 99.42.95.124 (talk) 08:31, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

According to Sony, all PS4 games can be downloaded digitally. So we only need this article and List of PlayStation 4 games released on disc. Every other page is redundant. — TPX 14:15, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Can we add labels for games that support HDR and/or 4K?
All PS4 models support HDR using HDR10, and several games have been listed to either support HDR at launch or will be patched to support it. Regular PS4 will output HDR at 1080p and PS4 Pro will output HDR at 4K. There may also be some games on PS4 Pro which don't support HDR, but will be supporting 4K. It would be nice to add colored label boxed like we have for VR/Move/Camera for HDR and 4K support as well. It may also be a good idea, at least for now, to somehow note which games are going to be patched to support it for those that don't already. As far as I'm aware, no games support HDR yet, and obviously 4K won't be supported until the PS4 Pro releases.

This page includes a list of several known titles as of September 7, 2016:

http://www.idigitaltimes.com/ps4-pro-forward-compatible-games-list-known-hdr-compatible-games-coming-new-console-554913

However, the page doesn't specify which of the two features each of the games will support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morphinapg (talk • contribs) 11:42, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I was getting ready to post something very similar, but I agree. I think there should be some notation if the game supports HDR and if it has PS4 Pro enhancements. -- JDC808  ♫  10:15, 1 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Something like HDR and Pro — TPX 11:25, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy a Timed exclusive game according to PlayStation Ireland Twitter!
https://twitter.com/PlayStationIE/status/834336383112212480

This is why it should be editied from YES to a Timed exclusive because of this tweet! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.149.149.6 (talk) 05:09, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Exclusivity update.
This goes for the other lists as well. I'd just assume that whoever updates the page ALSO updates the exclusive count. Can we start updating the exclusive count as well when updating the number of games added? Cause when I'm the only one doing that is very frustrating and pointless in my time. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 17:31, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The exclusive count has only decreased in recent days because several VR-only games have been removed. Unless you mean the 'multiplatform' count and this edit in which case, I forgot :)  — TPX 20:06, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of PlayStation 4 games. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151219000836/http://gematsu.com/2015/09/yakuza-kiwami-yakuza-6-announced-ps4 to http://gematsu.com/2015/09/yakuza-kiwami-yakuza-6-announced-ps4

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:40, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Two timed sections?
Do we really need two different timed tags...? Think this should be discussed before making a change like that anyways.. --Mordecairule 17:18, 11 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I personally think making a difference between timed exclusives where the game gets released on PC at the same time and where it is a true timed exclusive (like Rise of the Tomb Raider) is worth it. One use of this list is that users can see which games they cannot play when choosing a different platform. Stating that games are time exclusive to PS4 while available on PC at the same time misinforms those users, i believe. -- HeisenTime 18:53, 11 August 2017 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by HeisenTime (talk • contribs)


 * The table made a similar distinction in the past but at some point it was stopped. We had two discrete colors: One color denoted timed exclusives that appeared first on a single platform before later appearing elsewhere (e.g. Rise of the Tomb Raider, Final Fantasy VII Remake) and a second color type denoted console timed exclusives only. Editor HeisenTime's rationale (diff) is that labelling Absolver as a timed PS4 exclusive can be considered misleading because the game is also coming out on PC on the same date; however I assume he also wanted to preserve the likelihood of Absolver appearing on Xbox One later down the road, hence adding a color for timed console exclusives.  — Niche-gamer 18:58, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Uncharted Games Missing
I don't know why, but Uncharted: The Nathan Drake Collection, Uncharted 4: A Thief's End and Uncharted: The Lost Legacy are not on this list, and they are PS4 games. Just letting you know for the future. 96.48.235.8 (talk) 02:48, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Because they start with U. They are at List of PlayStation 4 games (M-Z). -- ferret (talk) 02:54, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of PlayStation 4 games. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150818090604/http://www.hamster.co.jp/american_hamster/arcadearchives/index.htm to http://www.hamster.co.jp/american_Hamster/arcadearchives/index.htm
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20150210051034/http://playstation.com/search-results/games/ to http://playstation.com/search-results/games/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:52, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Languages PS4 games are available in
Is there a way I can find out what languages North American versions of PS4 are available in? I mean in a list similar to this one or can someone point me to somewhere I could see that? -- Sion8 (talk) 20:37, 27 December 2017 (UTC) Sion8 (talk) 20:37, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

List of PlayStation 4 games (A-L) etc.
Due to the excessive page length, and now that List of download-only PlayStation 4 games has been deleted, I have taken the opportunity to split this article into separate pages (similar to List of PlayStation Vita games (A–L). This allows for expansion and more thorough sourcing without fear of bogging down mobile displays. Alas, I realize too late that I should have moved this page instead of creating a new article. Unless there is a better way, I will redirect to the new page shortly. — Niche-gamer 22:33, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I wish we could just have two separate lists - the games released on disc and the digital only games. I like to view games by release date and by splitting them up halfway through the alphabet I don't get to view them in order. Plus there's a big difference between disc games and digital only games. I just feel like it's smarter to separate them that way. My two cents. Dilute13 (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Full list?
The PS store currently has 1583 PS4 digital only games, not counting games that are released on disc. Gamespot lists 2349 games released for the PS4. This list has around 1700 games and includes games that haven't been released yet or aren't released in NA. Is this list complete? Dilute13 (talk) 03:06, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * The list is far from complete. However, we must remember that Wikipedia is not a comprehensive catalogue. The majority of games listed here are notable in at least one key respect: They either have their own article on Wikipedia, there are reliable sources that describe them, or the game is published by a notable developer. — Niche-gamer 14:04, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Merge the lists together
In my opinion, spiting the list in two is pointless. The Xbox One games list is unified, so why isn't this list unified too? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Metalheadgamer (talk • contribs) 13:22, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * This list is split for technical limitations. If merged, the templates will break and not display correctly. Other lists like Xbox One and Nintendo Switch are sitting right at the limit and will probably be split within the year. -- ferret (talk) 13:32, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Games on disc vs. digital games
I think this list should be separated into two lists - games released on disc and games only released digitally, similar to what has been done with the PS3 games. This list is far too long for one entry. Dilute13 (talk) 16:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * We purposefully merged them so there wasn't problems. The distinction isn't really relevant. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 18:10, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Project consensus at WP:VG is against that, and it's been repeatedly established. The PS3 list is an outlier and will eventually get merged by together, once someone has time. We do not denote physical release versus digital, under WP:NOTCATALOG reasonings. -- ferret (talk) 18:10, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I still have the PS3 list semi-completed from months ago. It just needs somebody to go through and remove all the duplicates, of which I have not had the time for lately. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 03:57, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Why isn't Star Wars Battlefront listed in article?
This might be a stupid question, but why aren't Star Wars Battlefront (2015 video game) and Star Wars Battlefront II (2017 video game) listed in this article? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 22:31, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Because they start with an "S": List of PlayStation 4 games (M–Z). -- ferret (talk) 22:40, 5 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the quick answer! But shouldn't this article be named List of PlayStation 4 games (A–N) or something similar? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 02:39, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Most "start of the list" articles don't have that, but I have no opinion on which way it should be. List of PlayStation 4 games (A-L) does lead here. The index/TOC shows this page is A through L, then links to M-Z -- ferret (talk) 02:42, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

PS+ titles
The lists of PS+ titles are under discussion of being deleted (Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Instant_Game_Collection_games_(North_America)_(2nd_nomination)). Would a good alternative be to add a PS+ section/tag in these lists? Ragowit (talk) 13:47, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Physical and Digital only
This game list is very huge, even after splitting it into those 2 sectons (A-L, M-Z), since they lists both physical and digital releases. It would be better, in my opinion, if this list was split into 2, one for the digital only games, and the other fort hose tht were realeased in bluray (the AAA in general), the same way as the PS3 games list are already organized. What do yout think? Ogat (talk) 03:28, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Addons
There hasn't been a lot of PS4 games designed around the camera peripheral or move controller this generation, not as many as anticipated when the Addons table was added. Same for 3D supported games. Unlike PS4 Pro games, which are listed on PlayStation's Japanese website, HDR supported games are hard to source. For these reasons and more I was thinking of removing them from the Addons table, leaving perhaps cross-play, Pro enhanced, PlayLink and VR supported games. Any objections? — Niche-gamer 17:50, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Move to List of PlayStation 4 games (A-L)
The current article appears as though it would contain every PS4 game, when it was split into two articles some time ago. Moving this article to List of PlayStation 4 games (A-L) would also keep things consistent with the lists of games for Switch and Xbox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitchdog72 (talk • contribs) 03:48, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

"Loot Rascals" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Loot Rascals. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 21 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:51, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Physical/Digital Split
At the very least, rather than make a separate section of the list for digital only releases, is there a way to add extra columns with checkmarks and x's denoting whether games are released physically only, digitally only, or both? This would greatly help preservationists, historians, and collectors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.75.188.99 (talk) 20:01, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Whether a game was released digitally or physically is not a defining feature of a game (compared to, say, a PSVR-supporting game) and thus not appropriate to track. --M asem (t) 20:41, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Same answer as given as the Wii U list. A strong consensus not to do this exists within the project. It's not going to happen. -- ferret (talk) 22:00, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

List script is broken?
I have performed a very simple python scraping of the table that generated 1,546 rows, while the script on the page states 3,226 games are in the table. A simple random picking didn't find any omissions in my table. A basic highlight, copy and paste to Excel task produces ~1,900 lines as some of the characters (such as at the game "11-11: Memories Retold" where there is a little dot between the two Developer "Aardman" and "DigixArt") are mistakenly interpreted by Excel as new line. I suggest reviewing the counting script and/or the character usage of the table (which might cause the script to count games erroneously). If the script is right and there are indeed 3,226 games in the table, I am curious where is my mistake and how can I extract those 3,226 games.

EDIT: I found my error, didn't list M-Z games, apologies. In case you think this entry should be deleted, please proceed.

Kalap ur (talk) 18:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

R.B.I. Baseball, European release dates
R.B.I. Baseball 16 - 06 Apr 2016 R.B.I. Baseball 17 - 28 Mar 2017 R.B.I. Baseball 18 - 26 Mar 2018 R.B.I. Baseball 19 - 15 Mar 2019

@Zacharyalejandro, here are sthe release dates for R.B.I. Baseball in Europe directly from the PlayStation Store. — Niche-gamer 19:56, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah. I must've looked at the wrong site then. Thanks. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 00:35, 26 March 2019 (UTC)


 * For some odd reason the PlayStation Store does not return results for "R.B.I.". But if you type "Baseball 19" into the search bar, hey presto, the game appears. — Niche-gamer 17:40, 26 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Hmm. That's odd though. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 18:08, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Nobunaga's Ambition: Taishi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobunaga%27s_Ambition lists the release "Nobunaga's Ambition: Taishi" released in 2017 for platforms including the PS4. I don't see a Nobunaga Title on this page for 2017. Does it belong on this list?--70.91.178.187 (talk) 14:44, 11 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Title now included on the list. — Niche-gamer 15:22, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

"Pavilion (video game)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Pavilion (video game) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 12 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Ost (talk) 06:17, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Poop Slinger
Poop Slinger is not on the list, is there any reason for this or should I just add it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.132.165 (talk) 19:25, 29 July 2021 (UTC)