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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony: We Should Probably Develop Less Games

RolStoppable said:
Khuutra said:
Falling but more focused game support, flagging console sales forcing the hand early, technological paradigms shifting away from more power = more better...

All according to plan.

So based on your post from yesterday, there's only one company missing to make everything go according to plan. I guess we'll see at E3, if they are up to the task.

I don't have a lot of confidence that Apple will be at E3.



Around the Network

It will be a sad day when the need for big sales numbers kills variety.



'It’s easy to say, “Yeah, let’s make three games a year.” But game development is dynamic. You cannot plan to do that. You already have to have a certain number of games in the pipeline hoping they hit in a certain year. We love working on new IPs. It’s really hard to predict when these games get finished.'

[sigh] They really have no idea what they're doing.

 



Jay520 said:
Darth Tigris said:
An article like this, say, 13 months ago would've been completely laughed at on this site. The number of exclusives for the PS3 made the 360 look downright pitiful, right? Those were the chants, ¿verdad? Yet here we are with even Sony themselves saying what some insightful ones have been saying for a long time: a high number of exclusives isn't THE answer. Hopefully now we can all acknowledge that and just move forward on that subject.

And don't get me started on the the number of 1st party studios argument ...

To be fair, many people thought that most of them would be AAA games as well, so their argument wasn't unreasonable. 

Unreasonable?  Ehhh ... that's arguable.  Premature and divisive?  Unquestionably.

Sure, the trend is to make bold statements so that if they come true one can claim so masterful bit of insightful prognostication.  But the reality is that we NEVER know how good ANY game will turn out.  To declare AAA dominance for so many of the PS3 exclusives last year prior to their release was just not a balanced or constructive approach for discussions on these forums.  Especially when it was used so wantonly to beat up the 360 and Microsoft Game Studios.  Fortunately more balanced individuals like Yoshida can view competitors as a platform for learning instead of seeking opportunities for public verbal teabagging...



That's reasonable I guess, since they do make more first party games (especially when it comes to new IPs) than MS and Nintendo combined.

They can afford to make a game or two less per year in order to better develop and advertise them.



Around the Network
Darth Tigris said:

Sure, the trend is to make bold statements so that if they come true one can claim so masterful bit of insightful prognostication.  But the reality is that we NEVER know how good ANY game will turn out.  To declare AAA dominance for so many of the PS3 exclusives last year prior to their release was just not a balanced or constructive approach for discussions on these forums.  Especially when it was used so wantonly to beat up the 360 and Microsoft Game Studios.  Fortunately more balanced individuals like Yoshida can view competitors as a platform for learning instead of seeking opportunities for public verbal teabagging...

Of course, we don't know, that's why we make predictions. Predictions are the driving force of many of the threads on here and there's nothing wrong with them, And considering the reception of many of the franchises, it looked plausible that the PS3 would dominate in AAA exclusives. 

I do agree that there were a lot of people overdoing the lineup though (I even did so myself). Many people used it to throw cheapshots at MS & the Xbox. 



Yeah when you have Resistance, Motorstorm, Killzone, InFamous, Socom, Uncharted, and LittleBigPlanet all coming out in the same year its hard to make each release feel momentous. But I really like Sony's portfolio I just wish it sold better.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1gWECYYOSo

Please Watch/Share this video so it gets shown in Hollywood.

reviniente said:

'It’s easy to say, “Yeah, let’s make three games a year.” But game development is dynamic. You cannot plan to do that. You already have to have a certain number of games in the pipeline hoping they hit in a certain year. We love working on new IPs. It’s really hard to predict when these games get finished.'

[sigh] They really have no idea what they're doing.

 


No they don't.  And that's the problem.  Sony has the ability to make great games, but is run so poorly as a business, they don't have the right people to do so.

Think about it.  This is a company that has lost 85% of its value in just a decade.  Just think about that for a minute.  That's insane.  It happens, sure, but never without consequence.  And also keep in mind its gaming division in general has been right there every year with steep losses.  Sometimes worse than the rest of Sony.  A company can only keep generating the same success with anything if they keep on going down.

Picture 85% of your value going down.  Turn that into regular $ and gaming terms.  That could mean that 85% of your gaming budget has gone down too.  So when before, you could have been rolling in cash, having little competition, and spending lots of ad money on everything, as well as putting out quality products... all of a sudden, now, you can't do that.  But still try to.  It causes inferior products (Some AAA titles not being as good as they should have been, or just disappointments altogether), poor selling games that just weren't marketed enough, as well as going from the big kid on the block to the smallest kid on the block, and in serious debt.  

They should stop making games like the disappointing socom series, clearly should and probably will abandon the awful selling resistance series (can't imagine they made any money on it), and focus on titles that have been successful, or could be if they spent more time on it. 

This makes me wonder how many times budgets have been cut on games in development that end up being disappointing for Sony.   It's like with Superman IV: The Quest for Peace... that movie was supposed to be Superman vs. Bizarro Superman... instead what we got was a film that is so terribly bad, it's laughable (check it out for those who haven't seen it, but only do it with friends so you can laugh at the crappy plot, editing, directing, acting, everything).  It's budget got cut to a quarter of what it was supposed to be, and ended up with a director who never even heard of Superman before (didn't know that was possible).



BOOM!  FACE KICK!

Uncharted and Little Big Planet sell exceptionally well for new IPs. Killzone also sells extremely well considering it was never, ever popular on the PS2.

They just need to better market the IPs they clearly care less about such as Infamous and Resistance.



ZaneWane said:
Rainbow Yoshi said:
Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception is selling considerably well and was only released 3 months ago. Microsoft rely on the same old franchises which boosts their profits as they do not take the plunge of seeing through a new franchise. Even Nintendo try to experiment with new franchises.

heavy bundling is what helping uncharted sell

Nope. 

Uncharted 3 was bundled thats true, but not heavily bundled. Besides the UC3 bundle costed more than a standard PS3, so most people buying it would've wanted UC3 anyway ?

Heavy bundling would be what MS did this holiday with Fable 3 and Reach, or with Forza 3, etc.