The PlayStation Store and Nintendo eShop are experiencing an influx of low-quality games, often utilizing generative AI and misleading marketing, a phenomenon some call "slop." This issue, initially more prominent on the eShop, has recently spread to the PlayStation Store, particularly impacting the "Games to Wishlist" section.
These aren't simply "bad" games; the problem lies in the sheer volume of similar, low-effort titles flooding the stores. These games, frequently simulation titles perpetually on sale, often mimic popular games' themes or names, employ AI-generated art that misrepresents the actual gameplay, and suffer from poor controls and technical issues. A small number of companies appear responsible for this prolific output, often operating with minimal online presence and frequently changing company names.
Users have demanded stricter storefront regulation, especially given the eShop's declining performance under the weight of these games. To understand the situation, we investigated the game release process across Steam, Xbox, PlayStation, and Nintendo Switch.
The Certification Process:
All four platforms require a developer/publisher pitch, followed by application forms detailing game specifics and undergoing a certification ("cert") process. Cert verifies technical compliance, legal adherence, and ESRB rating accuracy. While Steam and Xbox publicly list their requirements, Nintendo and Sony do not. A common misconception is that cert acts as a QA check; it does not. Developers are responsible for pre-submission QA; cert focuses on platform compliance. Rejection reasons are often vague, particularly from Nintendo.
Store Page Review:
All platforms require accurate game representation in screenshots. However, enforcement varies. While Nintendo and Xbox review all store page changes, PlayStation performs a single check near launch, and Valve only reviews the initial submission. The accuracy of game descriptions and screenshots is inconsistently checked, with developers often operating under an "ask for forgiveness, not permission" model. Consequences for misleading content are typically limited to content removal. None of the console storefronts explicitly regulate generative AI use. Steam requests disclosure but doesn't restrict it.
Why the Discrepancy?
The difference in "slop" levels stems from platform approval processes. Microsoft vets games individually, making it less susceptible to mass low-quality releases. Nintendo, Sony, and Valve approve developers, allowing easier mass submissions once approved. This, combined with lenient enforcement of image accuracy, enables the proliferation of "slop" games. Nintendo's developer approval process is particularly criticized for its ease of exploitation. Some developers exploit sale mechanisms to maintain high visibility on the eShop. PlayStation's "Games to Wishlist" sorting by release date exacerbates the issue.
Steam, despite having many potentially low-quality games, avoids significant user backlash due to its robust search and sorting options and the high volume of new releases constantly refreshing the storefront. Nintendo's unorganized "New Releases" section contributes to the problem.
Potential Solutions and Concerns:
Users have called for stricter regulation, but neither Nintendo nor Sony have responded to requests for comment. Developers express pessimism regarding Nintendo's willingness to change, though they note a small improvement with each console generation. Nintendo's web browser eShop is considered significantly better than its console counterpart. Sony has taken action against similar issues in the past, suggesting potential future intervention.
However, overly aggressive filtering, as demonstrated by Nintendo Life's "Better eShop" attempt, risks unfairly penalizing legitimate games. Concerns exist that stricter regulation could inadvertently target quality software. Developers emphasize their intention to create legitimate games and express understanding of the challenges faced by platform holders in reviewing the massive influx of submissions. The process is ultimately handled by individuals, not corporations, making consistent judgment difficult. The balance between allowing less-than-stellar games and preventing blatant cash grabs remains a challenge. The image below shows the PlayStation "Games to Wishlist" section at the time of writing.
The image below shows Nintendo's browser storefront.
