By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Why are you (and others) Playstation fans? Question about franchises

CGI-Quality said:
d21lewis said:
CGI-Quality said:
d21lewis said:

It's blowing my mind how people are saying that Sony is the only one with some sort of diversity.  As if Nintendo and Microsoft only make games like Mario and Halo.  Is it THAT easy to pretend that games like Animal Crossing, Viva Pinata, Fire Emblem, and Banjo Kazooie don't exist? 

Everybody has some sort of diversity.  Just because the other two have some sort of mega-franchise (and Sony does, too) that sells 10 million copies, that doesn't mean that's ALL they have.  C'mon!  I'd rather people point out that Sony always pushes for new formats (like they did with CD, UMD, DVD, and Blu Ray) or that Playstation has always been the home of blockbuster 3rd party franchises, or that they do their best to make sure Playstation owners aren't missing out on anything the other companies are pushing (motion control, rumble controllers, deep online).  Settling on the "Playstation means diversity" answer is a little lazy. 

For every inFamous, there's a Crackdown.  For every Gran Turismo, there's a Forza.  For every Uncharted, there's a Legend of Zelda or Alan Wake.  All companies are all things to all people.  Maybe Playstation has the preffered version of these genres?

In fairness, the OP seems to imply that Sony lacks an identity. So people are spot on when they say that Sony's diversity is their trump card. I agree that Sony doesn't have diversity in a vccuum, but as Euphoria pointed out, they've taken more risks on niche titles than their competitors, leaving them with more IPs, overall, than them as well.

So it's not that MS & Nintendo lack variety/diversity, but that Sony has it in spades, which is truly their identity.

What are these niche titles of which you speak?  And more IP's than Microsoft (likely since they've been at it since '95) but Nintendo!?  The only niche titles I can think of are Heavy Rain and Little Big Planet.  Hardly an avalanche.  How is this any different than how Nintendo backed Wario Ware or Animal Crossing or how MS backed Rare with Viva?

I'm not just being a dick (I AM being a dick but that's not all I'm being.)  I just want to challenge what people are thinking.

It's not just about the PS3, but the PlayStation in general. In fact, much of the PS1's library were very niche titles. Some just went big and became phenomenons. Nintendo isn't defined by their niches, that's the difference. They are defined by Mario (and to a higher extent of today) The Wii brand). Neither strategy is bad, but it's worked for Sony in a big way. Microsoft isn't defined by niches either, but a select few IPs that are either huge, big, or moderate.

And if you want to challenge anyone, it should be the OP of this thread. Most Sony fans in here have intelligent, reasonable answers. I mean, how did you read the OP, read the responses in here, and only want to challenge PS fans, while ignoring the fact that the OP sees nothing more than Gran Turismo as a noteworthy representation of the PlayStation brand?


I'm just quirky like that, I guess.

I think I gave a couple of pretty good replies about what made the Playstation brand awesome, too.  I read every post in this thread.  I just woke up this morning (about to go back to sleep, btw) and it seemed like everybody has settled on the "Playstatio diversity" answer.  For the record, I never challenged you, CGi.  I just responded when you quoted me (I have a tendancy to do that).  Anyhoo, whatever people's reasons are, it's THEIR reason.  I'm just playing devil's advocate.  And the OP is wrong, too.  The Playstation brand is bigger than the sum of it's parts.  For over a decade (since '95), nobody can deny that Playstation was (and still is, in the hearts of many) THE video game platform.  A couple of years of whatever negative media attention (PS3 launch) isn't going to change that.



Around the Network

My ties to the Playstation have nothing to do with the games.  I was a fan of Sony products since childhood, having owned a Dreammachine alarm clock since I was 5.  My parents seemed to always purchase Sony branded products as I grew up and it naturally continued with me.  

I bought the original Playstation out of sheer curiousity, playing Final Fantasy VII as my first game on the system.  Having been a fan of previous installments, it grew on me.  Since then I've purhcased all the PS systems, a nice Bravia for my family and receiver to complete the setup :) 



CGI-Quality said:
d21lewis said:
CGI-Quality said:
d21lewis said:
CGI-Quality said:
d21lewis said:

It's blowing my mind how people are saying that Sony is the only one with some sort of diversity.  As if Nintendo and Microsoft only make games like Mario and Halo.  Is it THAT easy to pretend that games like Animal Crossing, Viva Pinata, Fire Emblem, and Banjo Kazooie don't exist? 

Everybody has some sort of diversity.  Just because the other two have some sort of mega-franchise (and Sony does, too) that sells 10 million copies, that doesn't mean that's ALL they have.  C'mon!  I'd rather people point out that Sony always pushes for new formats (like they did with CD, UMD, DVD, and Blu Ray) or that Playstation has always been the home of blockbuster 3rd party franchises, or that they do their best to make sure Playstation owners aren't missing out on anything the other companies are pushing (motion control, rumble controllers, deep online).  Settling on the "Playstation means diversity" answer is a little lazy. 

For every inFamous, there's a Crackdown.  For every Gran Turismo, there's a Forza.  For every Uncharted, there's a Legend of Zelda or Alan Wake.  All companies are all things to all people.  Maybe Playstation has the preffered version of these genres?

In fairness, the OP seems to imply that Sony lacks an identity. So people are spot on when they say that Sony's diversity is their trump card. I agree that Sony doesn't have diversity in a vccuum, but as Euphoria pointed out, they've taken more risks on niche titles than their competitors, leaving them with more IPs, overall, than them as well.

So it's not that MS & Nintendo lack variety/diversity, but that Sony has it in spades, which is truly their identity.

What are these niche titles of which you speak?  And more IP's than Microsoft (likely since they've been at it since '95) but Nintendo!?  The only niche titles I can think of are Heavy Rain and Little Big Planet.  Hardly an avalanche.  How is this any different than how Nintendo backed Wario Ware or Animal Crossing or how MS backed Rare with Viva?

I'm not just being a dick (I AM being a dick but that's not all I'm being.)  I just want to challenge what people are thinking.

It's not just about the PS3, but the PlayStation in general. In fact, much of the PS1's library were very niche titles. Some just went big and became phenomenons. Nintendo isn't defined by their niches, that's the difference. They are defined by Mario (and to a higher extent of today) The Wii brand). Neither strategy is bad, but it's worked for Sony in a big way. Microsoft isn't defined by niches either, but a select few IPs that are either huge, big, or moderate.

And if you want to challenge anyone, it should be the OP of this thread. Most Sony fans in here have intelligent, reasonable answers. I mean, how did you read the OP, read the responses in here, and only want to challenge PS fans, while ignoring the fact that the OP sees nothing more than Gran Turismo as a noteworthy representation of the PlayStation brand?


I'm just quirky like that, I guess.

I think I gave a couple of pretty good replies about what made the Playstation brand awesome, too.  I read every post in this thread.  I just woke up this morning (about to go back to sleep, btw) and it seemed like everybody has settled on the "Playstatio diversity" answer.  For the record, I never challenged you, CGi.  I just responded when you quoted me (I have a tendancy to do that).  Anyhoo, whatever people's reasons are, it's THEIR reason.  I'm just playing devil's advocate.  And the OP is wrong, too.  The Playstation brand is bigger than the sum of it's parts.  For over a decade (since '95), nobody can deny that Playstation was (and still is, in the hearts of many) THE video game platform.  A couple of years of whatever negative media attention (PS3 launch) isn't going to change that.

If you took it as an attack, then I failed.

I wasn't meaning it that way (I know what kind of poster you truly are). I was just particularly frustrated with that OP.

Nah, I didn't feel threatend.  And I know what kind of guy you are, too (my personal pick for best poster 2010, if you didn't know).  Being able to see both sides of an argument is what makes people like you and I special.

--but since I have to go to work from 5:30pm to about 5:30am, I better get some sleep!  Later, dude!!



I'm a fan of the PS3 not the playstation brand as such, it has the games I like, soon as that isn't the case I'm off, I have absolutely no brand loyalty. 

Last gen I had an Xbox and a gamecube but never bothered with the PS2, this gen I decided to skip nintendo & xbox (got 1 for free recently, a friend gave me a 360),  never understood blind loyalty, though I do understand why people prefer x console.



richardhutnik said:
DonFerrari said:
richardhutnik said:
DonFerrari said:

This is a nice answer...

And my love for PS3 started with Genesis... as child i couldn't have 2 consoles and my dad bought us a Mega Drive (Genesis)... so i only played Super Nintendo (SNES) when i where in my friends house, so never were attached to Nintendo... i remember the chaos that SSF2 and MK being released multiplat (were exclusive to each console by the time)...

When i were 14 i saved enough money to buy my PS1 (200$, in US where 50~100$, Taxes is a B*tch) there weren't even buzz to N64... since the first GT to now i'm in love... as some said before me, Sony never left me behind with games... had 50 PS1, 150 PS2 and crossed 25 PS3 titles off all genres and parties...

My prefered games were never in other console... and i don't like shooters very much, so never tough Xbox were for me... i play kid/casual games casually =] so Wii/Nintendo isn't really what i need...

If you want to talk about prefered games we can go on =]

And sorry if i looked rude too you, didn't revised my post...

Well, it was kinda hard to come off as nice originally when I was probing with a speculative question, with "off the top of my head" and picking out the flagship reasons.  This apparently didn't fit the Playstation brand.  My question was a bit of an outside to near religious devotion I have seen towards the brand I didn't get why.  I understood others, but not this one.  Sony is a late comer, but took over for awhile.  I just didn't get the devotion to the brand and asked why.  For me, the Playstation brand became dominant, so I bought stuff for it.  I did this while watching Sega go under, a brand I happened to like.  So, the question is what lies at the heart of the devotion to the brand that some have, that I didn't get.  Mascots are merely shortcuts to the answer in question, but don't fully fit.

In regards to this, the only bit of bluntess I was personally offended by is people telling me to take the Playstation signature at the bottom (supposed to be next to the XBox one) as if it is some sort of badge of devotion someone is supposed to be fit to wear or not.  I have them in the signature, because I thought it was a way to show people what I am playing without needing to update it.  And yes, it shows Ratchet, whom I like as a character.

The tag question is just because if it doesn't show trophies it's really possible that you don't play so it could be a "fake" that you know a lot of people use here when say that they aren't biassed because they have all 3 system, but don't know a game that isn't hated or with great advertisiment...

And i see your point, VG shouldn't bring loyalty as religion... but people like to attach to things... and about later comers, M$ came later, and Sega lived less than PS and still have a lot of fans even today after being dead for almost 10 years (at least console-wiser, altought i still love my Genesis, play Sega games and always cared more for Sonic than Mario - i can't understand someone liking to play 20 games with the same guy each Gen.... it was like up to Wii to a game sell on Nintendo system it should be Mario's something - unless it were Zelda or some other quality games) and i thrill for speed not pasta...

But I think everybody said right, the diversity is what catter to us.



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."

Around the Network

the type/ quality of games... what really got me to support the playstation was Gran Turismo 



PLAYSTATION®3 is the future.....NOW.......B_E_L_I_E_V_E

d21lewis said:
CGI-Quality said:
d21lewis said:

It's blowing my mind how people are saying that Sony is the only one with some sort of diversity.  As if Nintendo and Microsoft only make games like Mario and Halo.  Is it THAT easy to pretend that games like Animal Crossing, Viva Pinata, Fire Emblem, and Banjo Kazooie don't exist? 

Everybody has some sort of diversity.  Just because the other two have some sort of mega-franchise (and Sony does, too) that sells 10 million copies, that doesn't mean that's ALL they have.  C'mon!  I'd rather people point out that Sony always pushes for new formats (like they did with CD, UMD, DVD, and Blu Ray) or that Playstation has always been the home of blockbuster 3rd party franchises, or that they do their best to make sure Playstation owners aren't missing out on anything the other companies are pushing (motion control, rumble controllers, deep online).  Settling on the "Playstation means diversity" answer is a little lazy. 

For every inFamous, there's a Crackdown.  For every Gran Turismo, there's a Forza.  For every Uncharted, there's a Legend of Zelda or Alan Wake.  All companies are all things to all people.  Maybe Playstation has the preffered version of these genres?

In fairness, the OP seems to imply that Sony lacks an identity. So people are spot on when they say that Sony's diversity is their trump card. I agree that Sony doesn't have diversity in a vccuum, but as Euphoria pointed out, they've taken more risks on niche titles than their competitors, leaving them with more IPs, overall, than them as well.

So it's not that MS & Nintendo lack variety/diversity, but that Sony has it in spades, which is truly their identity.

What are these niche titles of which you speak?  And more IP's than Microsoft (likely since they've been at it since '95) but Nintendo!?  The only niche titles I can think of are Heavy Rain and Little Big Planet.  Hardly an avalanche.  How is this any different than how Nintendo backed Wario Ware or Animal Crossing or how MS backed Rare with Viva?

I'm not just being a dick (I AM being a dick but that's not all I'm being.)  I just want to challenge what people are thinking.


Some niche title to mention are games like Trinity Universe, Disgaea, Eye of Judgement, 3D Dot Game Heroes, Demon's Souls, Folklore, Heavy Rain, Last Rebellion, Atelier Rorona or Catherine.

360 has titles like this but most stay stuck in Japan while with Sony consoles many of them reach the West. Nintendo usually won't bring them over either.

This is why most niche titles announced these days are announced on PS3, like Disgaea 4. 

 

Nintendo DS and PSP also have a great assortment of niche titles as well.

 

Edit - Realized Catherine is on 360 as well.



iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.

Currently playing:

Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)     

    

Got a retro room? Post it here!

At OP, if you can justify brand loyalty for Microsoft with "Loyalty to Microsoft is Halo, and what they did FPS.", it shouldnt be too hard to justify Sony's one...



DonFerrari said:
richardhutnik said:
DonFerrari said:
richardhutnik said:
DonFerrari said:

This is a nice answer...

And my love for PS3 started with Genesis... as child i couldn't have 2 consoles and my dad bought us a Mega Drive (Genesis)... so i only played Super Nintendo (SNES) when i where in my friends house, so never were attached to Nintendo... i remember the chaos that SSF2 and MK being released multiplat (were exclusive to each console by the time)...

When i were 14 i saved enough money to buy my PS1 (200$, in US where 50~100$, Taxes is a B*tch) there weren't even buzz to N64... since the first GT to now i'm in love... as some said before me, Sony never left me behind with games... had 50 PS1, 150 PS2 and crossed 25 PS3 titles off all genres and parties...

My prefered games were never in other console... and i don't like shooters very much, so never tough Xbox were for me... i play kid/casual games casually =] so Wii/Nintendo isn't really what i need...

If you want to talk about prefered games we can go on =]

And sorry if i looked rude too you, didn't revised my post...

Well, it was kinda hard to come off as nice originally when I was probing with a speculative question, with "off the top of my head" and picking out the flagship reasons.  This apparently didn't fit the Playstation brand.  My question was a bit of an outside to near religious devotion I have seen towards the brand I didn't get why.  I understood others, but not this one.  Sony is a late comer, but took over for awhile.  I just didn't get the devotion to the brand and asked why.  For me, the Playstation brand became dominant, so I bought stuff for it.  I did this while watching Sega go under, a brand I happened to like.  So, the question is what lies at the heart of the devotion to the brand that some have, that I didn't get.  Mascots are merely shortcuts to the answer in question, but don't fully fit.

In regards to this, the only bit of bluntess I was personally offended by is people telling me to take the Playstation signature at the bottom (supposed to be next to the XBox one) as if it is some sort of badge of devotion someone is supposed to be fit to wear or not.  I have them in the signature, because I thought it was a way to show people what I am playing without needing to update it.  And yes, it shows Ratchet, whom I like as a character.

The tag question is just because if it doesn't show trophies it's really possible that you don't play so it could be a "fake" that you know a lot of people use here when say that they aren't biassed because they have all 3 system, but don't know a game that isn't hated or with great advertisiment...

And i see your point, VG shouldn't bring loyalty as religion... but people like to attach to things... and about later comers, M$ came later, and Sega lived less than PS and still have a lot of fans even today after being dead for almost 10 years (at least console-wiser, altought i still love my Genesis, play Sega games and always cared more for Sonic than Mario - i can't understand someone liking to play 20 games with the same guy each Gen.... it was like up to Wii to a game sell on Nintendo system it should be Mario's something - unless it were Zelda or some other quality games) and i thrill for speed not pasta...

But I think everybody said right, the diversity is what catter to us.

In my case, people can check my profile here and see what I actually own.  I wanted to have a way to quickly show what I have been playing.  I do wish it worked like the XBox gamer card thing I had.  Well, now they weren't working, and just having the PS3 thing seemed not balanced, so it is out.  I really have no interest in trying to play "look at me, I am REALLY objective" so I then can do stealth trolling.  I have no place for that.  I will come out and say I am more pro-360, which I am.  Which then works the opposite.  When I speak highly of a PS3 title, it should count as extra.  I don't have an agenda to promote the Playstation stuff. 

Anyhow, what is interesting is scientific studies have found that brand loyalty, like people have for Harley-Davison, or Apple, or likely videogame consoles, map to similar parts of the brain that people have for religious faiths.  It is natural.  What one hopes is the bias doesn't boil over into fanboyism.  That can happen and often does.  Useless to request otherwise.  I happened to have to put an end to fanboyism when I witness the Commodore 64 trounce the Atari 8bit computer.  I eventually did get a Commodore 64 in the end though.



d21lewis said:

It's blowing my mind how people are saying that Sony is the only one with some sort of diversity.  As if Nintendo and Microsoft only make games like Mario and Halo.  Is it THAT easy to pretend that games like Animal Crossing, Viva Pinata, Fire Emblem, and Banjo Kazooie don't exist? 

Everybody has some sort of diversity.  Just because the other two have some sort of mega-franchise (and Sony does, too) that sells 10 million copies, that doesn't mean that's ALL they have.  C'mon!  I'd rather people point out that Sony always pushes for new formats (like they did with CD, UMD, DVD, and Blu Ray) or that Playstation has always been the home of blockbuster 3rd party franchises, or that they do their best to make sure Playstation owners aren't missing out on anything the other companies are pushing (motion control, rumble controllers, deep online).  Settling on the "Playstation means diversity" answer is a little lazy. 

For every inFamous, there's a Crackdown.  For every Gran Turismo, there's a Forza.  For every Uncharted, there's a Legend of Zelda or Alan Wake.  All companies are all things to all people.  Maybe Playstation has the preffered version of these genres?


The diference is that Sony owns First party that do all kind of games, while M$ have how many 1st Parties?

And Nintendo altought having some diversity for genres, is always the "all family gaming" titles, they don't attack niches or special audiences... but it work greatly for them.

@RichardRutinik: Don't forget team passion also, in Brazil soccer can really do things in people brain. And for balance - as you sad yourself as a Pro-Xbox360, have some good games for me in my friend X - normally less now games as i don't like FPS very much - Why don't you do a OP for why are people loyal to Xbox brand, even with pulling the plug in the first and RROD problems it would be nice to hear some anwsers (even more if they aren't Halo, Gears or Live)



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."