Umm battle Royals are no fad
slab_of_bacon said:
If the game is quality, you don't need another. Quality over quantity is pure video game success.
|
That depends on how you view it. Quality games also fall under opinions and preference.
For example a Racing game scores a 90+ Metacritic but only sells 4m copies compared to a 80+ Adventure game that sells 9m copies. Now that Racing game has counted as one of those quality games for the entire year. You might not be into racing games so regardless of its quality its basically meaningless for you.
Having alot more B grade games can fulfil more gamers preferences rather than acouple A grade games that fulfill alot less.
How i see it is theres nothing wrong with average games aslong as there fun, not broken and nobody wants bad games. We are all individuals and like different things.
There are plenty of companies that can release indie and B-tier content, Sony deciding to make less but assure best content possible that may not be to your taste isn't a real problem.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
1) High quality > Quantity of games
2) Strong exclusives will draw users, no need to rely on Streaming platforms.
^ this seems to be good.
I know MS is focusing ALOT on streaming, and hopeing its the future.
I just want a traditional console tbh.
Also agree that a few great fantastic games, beats haveing a ton of 60's metacritic type games.
Intrinsic said:
If we are to be honest though.... sony has pretty much remained constant with their output all generation. Contrary to what most think.
I didnt add Remakes, Remasters, PSN only games, Published exclusives (eg NiOH), VR games and the annual MLB games.
So yeah, sony kinda releases an average of 3 major games a year.
I think what he"s saying is that he would prefer they have only 2 releases a year where each game is selling like 10M copies than have 3 where only one sells like 10M copies and the other two sell like 5M each
And I don think we have any reason to doubt what kinda games sony makes or supports. They have 4 generations of ding that under their belt..... and even stuck with their guns when everyone was saying single player is dead...
|
It makes me sad that either don't think Hots Shots Golf counts or that you just forgot about it.
outlawauron said:
It makes me sad that either don't think Hots Shots Golf counts or that you just forgot about it. |
And it's actually a funny game, and I picked it from bargain bin.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
Where did Layden say he wanted fewer games?
"He also hinted that Sony's ready to buy up other game makers as it looks to expand the types of games it makes. He isn't alone, either. Microsoft's Xbox team has announced several game studio acquisitions in the past year as gaming takes on more prominence at that company."
The quote about fewer games comes from the question about Sony & BR. Layden's answer hints that Sony is looking at possible studio acquisition(s):
"I think we've done a lot over the last three or four years to get us to a place right now where we're building fewer games per year than ever before, but we're spending more time, more energy, certainly more money, on making them.
So we're striking on all the beats that we want to, and we're getting both critical and commercial acclaim. Let's see now what we might add to our arsenal. I've looked at some opportunities in the past, it's an opportunity to look for the ones that are the best cultural fit."
When asked about the decision making behind buying a studio:
"We're always exploring opportunities. If we found a partner or a team or a game that we felt was particularly meaningful and interesting in a service area, we will look to bring that in. We're always open to that kind of experience."
Sums up SIE's vision as 'first, best or must.'
Insomniac, Kojima Productions, Bluepoint & Supermassive Games.
These are the studios Sony will most likely purchase, IMO.
Hasn't Sony done this already?
I mean, the amount of games Sony studios used to release in the PS3 days was far higher than nowadays.
Intrinsic said:
Its not even possible to fix. If you will notice it though thats another matter. But genres (fighting games) or FPS games that are best played at 60fps will suffer it the most. |
I had my doubts as well. Not even a fiber connection will make this work. When the time comes and they force it down our throats, they can go screw themselves.