Quantcast
Why does Sony fail at making another mega franchise?

Forums - Sales Discussion - Why does Sony fail at making another mega franchise?

Microsoft has more money to market their games. I mean I saw more adds for Crackdown 2 then I did for God of War 3.

Sony and Microsoft are at battle at making "the" home theatre station. They both want their console to be the centerpeice of your livingroom. Except Sony went all out, making a PS3 Blu-Ray before Blu-Ray was cheap and practical to produce. They put too much in, and it's hurting them. Only recently have they seen a profit. Microsoft simply wanted to control games, and influence movies. I think a 360 successor will try to be "the" home theatre system, but with the 360 Microsoft simply wanted to make a name for themselves.

To put it simply, thats what they are doing, convincing people that they are "the" gaming platform for gamers. Yes Wii sells better, but 360 is the gamers system.

Microsoft still puts out as many great products as Sony does, this year I see 7 big exclusives on both consoles. For 360 there are Halo, Fable, Mass Effect, Alan Wake, Splinter Cell: Conviction, Crackdown 2, and Metro 2033 (I know there are more). For PS3 there are GT5, LBP2, God of War 3, Heavy Rain, MAG, ModNation Racers, White Knight Chronicles (Again I know there are more).

However Microsoft has Call of Duty limited bundles, early map packs for 3 more years, and they do stuff like this with all big titles. They have enough money, 360 generates cash, and Microsoft spends it making a name for themselves.

So that is why 360 titles are always soo successful saleswise. Sony on the other hand, I blaime a lack of a solid fanbase. Hear me out, an FPS on the 360 will sell extremly well because the 360 is full of FPS nuts, and has established itself (through a few great early titles, and marketing) as the Shooter console. However Mass Effect, Lost Odyssey, and Tales of Vesperia didn't sell that well. Thats because the 360 lacks a significant RPG fanbase. Don't get me wrong, I love my RPG's, especially the 360 installments, however I can see why a lot of die hard RPG nuts don't relate Microsoft to RPG console.

So for the PS3 FPS don't sell well. No matter how good Uncharted, Killzone, and Resistance are, there is a lack of a PS3 favoring FPS fanbase. That shows in it's regional sales (Most PS3 fans are from EMEAA, a place where ALL FPS just don't do that well).

However Racing games sell well on the PS3, so do RPG's. Take a look at GT5 Prologue, and Final Fantasy XIII.

In conclusion, 360 games are successful due to marketing and a strong FPS fanbase, PS3 games generally aren't as successful because established fanbases are for smaller genres like racing and RPG. Many of PS3's past exclusive titles have gone multiplatform as well (See P.S. below)

P.S. for Sony established mega franchises, Final Fantasy was exclusive to Sony during the PS1 and PS2 era, MGS still kind of is, Gran Turismo is also a big Sony branded game, and until GTA IV came out, GTA was largly associated with Sony. God of War is pretty epic still, and so are Kingdom Hearts and Dragon Quest. Resident Evil was mega on the PS1.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Around the Network
Michael-5 said:

Microsoft has more money to market their games. I mean I saw more adds for Crackdown 2 then I did for God of War 3.

Sony and Microsoft are at battle at making "the" home theatre station. They both want their console to be the centerpeice of your livingroom. Except Sony went all out, making a PS3 Blu-Ray before Blu-Ray was cheap and practical to produce. They put too much in, and it's hurting them. Only recently have they seen a profit. Microsoft simply wanted to control games, and influence movies. I think a 360 successor will try to be "the" home theatre system, but with the 360 Microsoft simply wanted to make a name for themselves.

To put it simply, thats what they are doing, convincing people that they are "the" gaming platform for gamers. Yes Wii sells better, but 360 is the gamers system.

Microsoft still puts out as many great products as Sony does, this year I see 7 big exclusives on both consoles. For 360 there are Halo, Fable, Mass Effect, Alan Wake, Splinter Cell: Conviction, Crackdown 2, and Metro 2033 (I know there are more). For PS3 there are GT5, LBP2, God of War 3, Heavy Rain, MAG, ModNation Racers, White Knight Chronicles (Again I know there are more).

However Microsoft has Call of Duty limited bundles, early map packs for 3 more years, and they do stuff like this with all big titles. They have enough money, 360 generates cash, and Microsoft spends it making a name for themselves.

So that is why 360 titles are always soo successful saleswise. Sony on the other hand, I blaime a lack of a solid fanbase. Hear me out, an FPS on the 360 will sell extremly well because the 360 is full of FPS nuts, and has established itself (through a few great early titles, and marketing) as the Shooter console. However Mass Effect, Lost Odyssey, and Tales of Vesperia didn't sell that well. Thats because the 360 lacks a significant RPG fanbase. Don't get me wrong, I love my RPG's, especially the 360 installments, however I can see why a lot of die hard RPG nuts don't relate Microsoft to RPG console.

So for the PS3 FPS don't sell well. No matter how good Uncharted, Killzone, and Resistance are, there is a lack of a PS3 favoring FPS fanbase. That shows in it's regional sales (Most PS3 fans are from EMEAA, a place where ALL FPS just don't do that well).

However Racing games sell well on the PS3, so do RPG's. Take a look at GT5 Prologue, and Final Fantasy XIII.

In conclusion, 360 games are successful due to marketing and a strong FPS fanbase, PS3 games generally aren't as successful because established fanbases are for smaller genres like racing and RPG. Many of PS3's past exclusive titles have gone multiplatform as well (See P.S. below)

P.S. for Sony established mega franchises, Final Fantasy was exclusive to Sony during the PS1 and PS2 era, MGS still kind of is, Gran Turismo is also a big Sony branded game, and until GTA IV came out, GTA was largly associated with Sony. God of War is pretty epic still, and so are Kingdom Hearts and Dragon Quest. Resident Evil was mega on the PS1.

Funnily enough, most of those games are not made by Microsoft, while Sony makes just about all of theirs on the list. 



NYANKS said:
Killiana1a said:

By my definition, yes Wii Sports is the greatest of all time because it has sold the most. Who have I seen playing it? Seniors in nursing homes, girlfriends, moms, dads, little sisters, and on. It is the greatest because of the  sheer sales and capturing a market that a Final Fantasy game, Uncharted,  Infamous, Modern Warfare, and on could never catch no matter how much it is polished.

Games are first and foremost about fun. Wii Sports is fun. Niche games are fun too, but they are not as great because their sales numbers are indicative of a limited audience who can have fun playing them.

If I wanted to work my brain or think, then I read. I don't come home at 6am from work thinking, what game will be the most stressful intellectual activity? I play games for fun, but it has become convoluted over the years because as niche games have gotten more complex or nichey, players for some illogical reason set these games as the bar for greatness.

A series like Legacy of Kain is great and beloved by many including me, but it is a picnic compared to Wii Sports' three course meal. Wii Sports developers get paid while many niche game developers look for another job once their niche series has run it's course and can't put food on their table anymore.

"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth."

I guess it just comes down to everyone's standard of quality.  I don't know how many would agree with you here, but we are the illogical players you speak of as well.  Most seniors, girlfriends or little children either know nothing else or can't do anythin more complicated than hold right and jump.  I am fully aware that simplicity = popualrity. Look at movies, they weren't as comlicated as they are now. Mediums evolve.  I think games have the same potential.  Very few people watch the contenders for Best Picture, very few will read a book like The Stranger.  Does this mean Twilight eclipses these works?  Oh opinions, gotta love 'em.

Games are about pure, unadulterated fun.  Many games offer this.  

I started by using "My" which was asked for. I am no arbiter of truth or fact.

Many games do offer fun, but I find games becoming a chore with achievments. As the neurotic type, I try to get all the achievments, which many times are not fun at all. This is a problem of my own making. The resolution will be of my own making.



They just dont have the money to focus that much on every franchise,they have lost  tons with the PS3 already,they cant risk having HUGE marketing,and then suffer from bad sales.Thats the main reason Sony keeps it low this generation.

Their main target is to get a part of their money back.



Killiana1a said:
NYANKS said:
Killiana1a said:

By my definition, yes Wii Sports is the greatest of all time because it has sold the most. Who have I seen playing it? Seniors in nursing homes, girlfriends, moms, dads, little sisters, and on. It is the greatest because of the  sheer sales and capturing a market that a Final Fantasy game, Uncharted,  Infamous, Modern Warfare, and on could never catch no matter how much it is polished.

Games are first and foremost about fun. Wii Sports is fun. Niche games are fun too, but they are not as great because their sales numbers are indicative of a limited audience who can have fun playing them.

If I wanted to work my brain or think, then I read. I don't come home at 6am from work thinking, what game will be the most stressful intellectual activity? I play games for fun, but it has become convoluted over the years because as niche games have gotten more complex or nichey, players for some illogical reason set these games as the bar for greatness.

A series like Legacy of Kain is great and beloved by many including me, but it is a picnic compared to Wii Sports' three course meal. Wii Sports developers get paid while many niche game developers look for another job once their niche series has run it's course and can't put food on their table anymore.

"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth."

I guess it just comes down to everyone's standard of quality.  I don't know how many would agree with you here, but we are the illogical players you speak of as well.  Most seniors, girlfriends or little children either know nothing else or can't do anythin more complicated than hold right and jump.  I am fully aware that simplicity = popualrity. Look at movies, they weren't as comlicated as they are now. Mediums evolve.  I think games have the same potential.  Very few people watch the contenders for Best Picture, very few will read a book like The Stranger.  Does this mean Twilight eclipses these works?  Oh opinions, gotta love 'em.

Games are about pure, unadulterated fun.  Many games offer this.  

I started by using "My" which was asked for. I am no arbiter of truth or fact.

Many games do offer fun, but I find games becoming a chore with achievments. As the neurotic type, I try to get all the achievments, which many times are not fun at all. This is a problem of my own making. The resolution will be of my own making.

I agree, achievements/trophies suck.  Waste of time and take away from true enjoyment if you let them.  You have to soak the game in.  Sometimes I'll stand in a spot for a minute or two takin in how gorgeous or awesome something is.  I investigate everything.  It's fun to me.  Perhaps it's a function of playing games for so long.  I love Mario, but I can accept and appreciate other things that do their jobs just as well.   



Around the Network
NYANKS said:
Michael-5 said:

Microsoft has more money to market their games. I mean I saw more adds for Crackdown 2 then I did for God of War 3.

Sony and Microsoft are at battle at making "the" home theatre station. They both want their console to be the centerpeice of your livingroom. Except Sony went all out, making a PS3 Blu-Ray before Blu-Ray was cheap and practical to produce. They put too much in, and it's hurting them. Only recently have they seen a profit. Microsoft simply wanted to control games, and influence movies. I think a 360 successor will try to be "the" home theatre system, but with the 360 Microsoft simply wanted to make a name for themselves.

To put it simply, thats what they are doing, convincing people that they are "the" gaming platform for gamers. Yes Wii sells better, but 360 is the gamers system.

Microsoft still puts out as many great products as Sony does, this year I see 7 big exclusives on both consoles. For 360 there are Halo, Fable, Mass Effect, Alan Wake, Splinter Cell: Conviction, Crackdown 2, and Metro 2033 (I know there are more). For PS3 there are GT5, LBP2, God of War 3, Heavy Rain, MAG, ModNation Racers, White Knight Chronicles (Again I know there are more).

However Microsoft has Call of Duty limited bundles, early map packs for 3 more years, and they do stuff like this with all big titles. They have enough money, 360 generates cash, and Microsoft spends it making a name for themselves.

So that is why 360 titles are always soo successful saleswise. Sony on the other hand, I blaime a lack of a solid fanbase. Hear me out, an FPS on the 360 will sell extremly well because the 360 is full of FPS nuts, and has established itself (through a few great early titles, and marketing) as the Shooter console. However Mass Effect, Lost Odyssey, and Tales of Vesperia didn't sell that well. Thats because the 360 lacks a significant RPG fanbase. Don't get me wrong, I love my RPG's, especially the 360 installments, however I can see why a lot of die hard RPG nuts don't relate Microsoft to RPG console.

So for the PS3 FPS don't sell well. No matter how good Uncharted, Killzone, and Resistance are, there is a lack of a PS3 favoring FPS fanbase. That shows in it's regional sales (Most PS3 fans are from EMEAA, a place where ALL FPS just don't do that well).

However Racing games sell well on the PS3, so do RPG's. Take a look at GT5 Prologue, and Final Fantasy XIII.

In conclusion, 360 games are successful due to marketing and a strong FPS fanbase, PS3 games generally aren't as successful because established fanbases are for smaller genres like racing and RPG. Many of PS3's past exclusive titles have gone multiplatform as well (See P.S. below)

P.S. for Sony established mega franchises, Final Fantasy was exclusive to Sony during the PS1 and PS2 era, MGS still kind of is, Gran Turismo is also a big Sony branded game, and until GTA IV came out, GTA was largly associated with Sony. God of War is pretty epic still, and so are Kingdom Hearts and Dragon Quest. Resident Evil was mega on the PS1.

Funnily enough, most of those games are not made by Microsoft, while Sony makes just about all of theirs on the list. 

Technically Sony only owns the studios that make their first party titles. Nintendo is the only company to really develop their own games, where only a handful are handled by other studios (Pokemon by Game Freak, and Metroid: Other M by Team Ninja). You may think some other Nintendo franchises are developed by third party companies (Advance Wars and Fire Emblem by Intelligent systems, Metroid Prime, and DKCR by Retro Studios, and Smash Bros/Kirby by HAL Laboritories), but if you do a history lesson, these companies originally branched off from Nintendo R&D 1&2, Nintendo EAD 1-5, or were simply bought out in early life. I beleive Camalot, Game Freak, Team Ninja, and Creatures Inc were the only developers that ever got to work on a big Nintendo project (Golden Sun/Mario Sports, Pokemon, Metroid: Other M, and Earthbound).

This is similar to Bungie, which was conceived by Microsoft.

To my knowledge, the only first party studio that originated withing Sony would have been Polyphony digital, everything else was bought out. Even Square-Enix, Sony bought large shares for that company back during the N64 days, and thats why Final Fantasy games largly remain exclusive.

Edit, I looked it up. Polyphony Digital, SCE, Zipper Interactive, Naughty Dog, Guerrilla Games, Evolution Studios, and Media Module are the big ones. So Sony develops Gran Turismo, God of War, Ape Escape, Ico, SOCOM, Uncharted, Ratchet & Clank, Sly Cooper, Jak & Dexter, Killzone, Motorstorm and LBP

Microsoft has 343 Studios, Lionhead, Rare, Turn 10, and Wingnut Studios. So they develop Halo, Fable, Conker, Perfect Dark, Killer Instinct, Forza, and flight simulator.

Most of these companies have been bought out, the difference from Nintendo to Sony and MS, is that most of their studios separated from Nintendo development studios to work on different games. I think Nintendo only bought Retro Studios.

If your refering to games released in 2010, all 360 titles are published by Microsoft, and PS3 titles are published by Sony.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

The answer is "AGE GROUPS". Look alot of people here blame marketing/depending on 3rd party support.... blah blah blah. But selling games and consoles you realise it's the answer is what age groups are buying these consoles.

In order as i see it Nintendo: KIds (families that have kids) and 40 women (all buy what friend s and family have and seldom buy anything different as you can witness on this sight)

                                 Xbox:Young-Teenage boys, 20 men (no real care for saving just wants the next fps thier mates have)

                                 Playstation: 20 men (mostly in ther 30's)  Teenage boys (Generally buys a game after research abit anal, doesn't throw there money around)

I have no real stats on this but I sold the most consoles in canada 2009 so i sort of pick up on these things



mhsillen said:
Slimebeast said:

But I'm only happy that Sony doesn't have any mega franchises.

I don't like mega franchises because they always tend to dominate everything else and overshadow other great games (at least in the eyes of casuals they do).

I always hated GTA for being so huge. In this generation that game is Call of Duty. All other shooters are compared to Call of Duty and they even have to adjust release dates in fear of CoD.

I love Assassin's Creed but I'm starting to feel it's getting too big (I mean AC II is on track to sell 10 million. 10 million!)

I hate Mario because everyone buys Mario instead of other platformers which I think are far more interesting.

I love Xbox but I don't like the extreme hype for Halo as if it's the only game on earth. Same with Gears of War.

And most of all I hate World of Warcraft and Starcraft because I don't like the style of Blizzard and it pisses me off that everyone is playing WoW and ignoring better MMOs. I will get Diablo but I think it's extremely overrated and it pisses me off.

And Age of Empires slays Starcraft.

what platform game is better?

lbp?  uh no sorry

Name a few platformers.



Zipper said:

Sony has been in the console business for 15 year. 

They've created 3 amazing consoles, two of them being amazingly popular and one the best selling home console in the world. They own the most amazing developers, I believe today Sony is only second to Nintendo in  quality when it comes to first party titles. They created dozens franchises, some of them more popular than others yet only one of them - Gran Turismo, has been extremely popular and with Gran Turismo 5 releasing soon, we will see if the franchise is still popular as it was before.

I'm trying to think why, in 15 years, they couldn't make at least one extremely popular franchise among the dozens they've created? Even back in the PS2 era, Sony created some of the best titles on the system, but they still weren't crazy popular

Titles that are critically acclaimed - Uncharted 2, God of War 3, Killzone 2 - Why do they fail to reach their sales potential? It obvious the potential is there

Take Uncharted 2 for example. It the most critically acclaimed of the bunch, it has multiplayer, co-op and I can't take of a game that is more easy to market - yet it failed to make an impact and dropped of the NPD for good after one month of sales which weren't extremely good anyway

Why do titles like Gears of War (for some reason the eastiest title to compare to Uncharted) do so much better?

Why do titles like Killzone 2 which had a huge amount of hype and belongs to the most popular genre on consoles today failed to sell the millions everyone thought it will?

It an interesting topic I think we should discuss


The answer is easy.  SONY targets their fanbase and the gamers first, the masses second.  Since you mentioned Nintendo, they just simply did a better job catering to the masses with their pseudo motion controls while still concentrating on their core franchises.  



Hackers are poor nerds who don't wash.

Liquiduval said:

The answer is "AGE GROUPS". Look alot of people here blame marketing/depending on 3rd party support.... blah blah blah. But selling games and consoles you realise it's the answer is what age groups are buying these consoles.

In order as i see it Nintendo: KIds (families that have kids) and 40 women (all buy what friend s and family have and seldom buy anything different as you can witness on this sight)

                                 Xbox:Young-Teenage boys, 20 men (no real care for saving just wants the next fps thier mates have)

                                 Playstation: 20 men (mostly in ther 30's)  Teenage boys (Generally buys a game after research abit anal, doesn't throw there money around)

I have no real stats on this but I sold the most consoles in canada 2009 so i sort of pick up on these things


Rather general, but I too see a similar trend.



Hackers are poor nerds who don't wash.