The PlayStation Store and Nintendo eShop are facing an influx of low-quality games, often described as "slop," raising concerns among users. These games, frequently simulation titles, utilize generative AI for misleading marketing materials and often bear striking resemblance to popular titles, sometimes even copying names. This issue, initially prominent on the eShop, has recently spread to the PlayStation Store, particularly impacting the "Games to Wishlist" section.
The problem isn't simply the presence of bad games; it's the overwhelming quantity of nearly identical, low-effort titles overshadowing legitimate releases. These games often feature poor controls, technical issues, and limited gameplay, failing to match their advertised visuals. A small number of companies appear responsible for this surge, making them difficult to identify and hold accountable due to limited online presence and frequent name changes.
Users have demanded stricter storefront regulation, particularly given the eShop's declining performance under the weight of these games. An investigation into the process of game release on major platforms—Steam, Xbox, PlayStation, and Nintendo Switch—reveals potential explanations for this disparity.
The Certification Process
Interviews with eight anonymous game developers and publishers shed light on the game release process. All four platforms follow a similar pattern: developers pitch their games, complete forms detailing technical specifications, and undergo certification ("cert") to ensure compliance with platform requirements. These requirements, publicly available for Steam and Xbox but not Nintendo or Sony, cover technical aspects, legal compliance, and ESRB ratings.
A common misconception is that certification acts as a quality assurance check. It doesn't; developers are responsible for pre-submission QA. Certification focuses on technical compliance and legal adherence. Nintendo was frequently cited for rejecting games without clear explanations.
Store Page Review
While all platforms require accurate game representation in screenshots, enforcement varies. Reviews primarily focus on consistency (e.g., correct controller buttons) and language. One instance involved Nintendo rejecting screenshots that were impossible to render on the Switch, highlighting the lack of access to game builds for store page reviewers.
Nintendo and Xbox review store page changes before launch, while PlayStation performs a single pre-launch check. Valve reviews pages initially but not subsequently. The level of diligence in verifying store page accuracy against the actual game is inconsistent, often relying on developers' self-reporting. Penalties for inaccurate information typically involve removal of the content, not developer delisting. None of the console platforms have specific rules regarding generative AI use in games or store assets, though Steam requests disclosure.
The "Slop" Disparity
The disparity in "slop" across platforms stems from several factors. Microsoft vets games individually, unlike Nintendo, Sony, and Valve, which vet developers. This makes Microsoft less susceptible to the problem. Developers highlighted Xbox's higher standards and hands-on approach as contributing factors.
Nintendo's developer-based approval process and focus on technical violations allow a few companies to flood the eShop. One developer described Nintendo as the "easiest to scam." A publisher detailed a tactic used to maintain high visibility on the eShop: releasing new bundles with minimal changes immediately after previous sales expire. A similar problem exists on PlayStation, where automatic lists prioritize new releases, pushing high-quality, long-developed games down.
While generative AI is often blamed, it's not the root cause. The games themselves, regardless of quality, are human-made. Xbox, despite being less affected, might be less likely to discourage AI use due to its investment in the technology. Discoverability also plays a role; Xbox's curated store makes it harder to find low-quality games, while PlayStation's "Games to Wishlist" sorting exacerbates the issue. Steam, despite having potential "slop," is less criticized due to its robust search and filtering options and constantly updating new releases section.
Calls for Action
Users are urging Nintendo and Sony to address this issue. Neither company responded to requests for comment. Developers expressed pessimism, anticipating limited improvements, even with the Nintendo Switch 2. One noted that Nintendo's web browser eShop is significantly better than the console app. While Sony has taken action against similar issues in the past, the effectiveness of aggressive platform regulation is debated. An example of overly aggressive filtering by Nintendo Life highlighted the risk of accidentally targeting legitimate games.
Developers expressed concerns about arbitrary judgment of software legitimacy and the difficulty of distinguishing between various levels of game quality. They emphasized that platform holders are not tasked with judging game quality, but rather ensuring compliance with technical and legal requirements. The sheer volume of submissions makes it challenging to effectively identify and address all instances of misleading or low-quality content.
