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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony has trademarked names for two new IP's.

S.T.A.G.E. on 09 August 2012
Jay520 said:
happydolphin said:

Yeah, I wasn't personally belittling as you can tell from the civil convo with S.T.A.G.E. and Kitler. I just would like the same, that in Sony forums if belittling of Sony is not acceptable, than belittling of non-Sony wouldn't either. As such I was just taken aback by fusioncode's comment (not in an intense way, hense the short question "are you really that biased"). I didn't think the convo I was having with S.T.A.G.E. and Kitler was derailing if it is I will stop.


To be honest, I stopped reading through the thread after I saw the first few shit-stirring posts from various users. As I started reading more & more into the thread, the attacks started to become more & more frequent. Once I got to the DirtyP/FusionCode posts, I knew what the thread had become. After that, I started ignoring any posts with quote trees. It looked like another classic Sony VS Nintendo or Sony VS Microsoft console war. I couldn't bear what would likely be twisting of logic to fit people's argument (several posters are known for this). So yeah, I wasn't really calling you out since I didn't read the debate you were having.


Some people just have to bring Sonys financial issues into the reasoning as to why they shouldn't come out with new IP's. When one sticks they'll stand by it.



Around the Network
Play4Fun on 09 August 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Play4Fun said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
logic56 said:
Sony can't afford to make games

/thread


Yeah....sure, its called heart. Anyway, its better to have a company focused on new and old ip's rather than a company that lives off of old IP's (obviously not bad ones) and another whose first party isnt on par and depends on third party.


Obviously you want to turn this into a console war, since it's what you, Turkish and MUGEN do best, so let's go.

Nintendo has created more IPs in the last ten years than Sony has and you can bet they're going to create some new ones next gen. Just a few weeks  ago they trademarked, "The Last Ranger."

Oh, and Unlike Nintendo, Sony can't live off old IPs since most of theirs lose popularity quickly or weren't popular enough to carry into a next generation.


Sony will continues to make new IP's. It doesn't matter if one catches on. Some of even the popular ones die off. Nintendo characters live in realms with no serious or linear story that has no end. Its not a bad thing, but its reasons why a series like Gears, God of War, Halo must eventually end.

Also as for Microsoft Phil Spencer already admitted to AAA titles being too expensive to make as to why there arent many on the 360. Well this doesnt seem to stop Sony? A reason why I said Sony has heart.


yes, the way Nintendo designs their games is the reason why their games have so much longetivity.

MS has way more money than Sony does. Sony created a whole bunch of new IPS this gen because PS3 faltered out of the gate and they were losing large sums of cash. They needed games to push PS3 sales and to recoup some of their losses.

MS, wasn't in such a situation. Their biggest focus this gen is expanding their customer demographic and building an online system so they can push for that multi-media living room box they've been aiming for.

Just like any other company, Sony is just driving their business forward. Not sure why you are talking about them 'having heart' and 'making you proud'.



Turkish on 09 August 2012

Why I love gaming.



S.T.A.G.E. on 09 August 2012
Play4Fun said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Play4Fun said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
logic56 said:
Sony can't afford to make games

/thread


Yeah....sure, its called heart. Anyway, its better to have a company focused on new and old ip's rather than a company that lives off of old IP's (obviously not bad ones) and another whose first party isnt on par and depends on third party.


Obviously you want to turn this into a console war, since it's what you, Turkish and MUGEN do best, so let's go.

Nintendo has created more IPs in the last ten years than Sony has and you can bet they're going to create some new ones next gen. Just a few weeks  ago they trademarked, "The Last Ranger."

Oh, and Unlike Nintendo, Sony can't live off old IPs since most of theirs lose popularity quickly or weren't popular enough to carry into a next generation.


Sony will continues to make new IP's. It doesn't matter if one catches on. Some of even the popular ones die off. Nintendo characters live in realms with no serious or linear story that has no end. Its not a bad thing, but its reasons why a series like Gears, God of War, Halo must eventually end.

Also as for Microsoft Phil Spencer already admitted to AAA titles being too expensive to make as to why there arent many on the 360. Well this doesnt seem to stop Sony? A reason why I said Sony has heart.


yes, the way Nintendo designs their games is the reason why their games have so much longetivity.

MS has way more money than Sony does. Sony created a whole bunch of new IPS this gen because PS3 faltered out of the gate and they were losing large sums of cash. They needed games to push PS3 sales and to recoup some of their losses.

MS, wasn't in such a situation. Their biggest focus this gen is expanding their customer demographic and building an online system so they can push for that multi-media living room box they've been aiming for.

Just like any other company, Sony is just driving their business forward. Not sure why you are talking about them 'having heart' and 'making you proud'.

Microsofts situation/problem is creativity, not financials. It doesn't matter how much money Microsoft has, Microsoft has had to depend on third party because their first party lacking within two generations. Halo itself from its origin wasnt a first party game until Microsoft bought it. The best first party game Microsoft studios has created that stuck is probably Forza.

Microsoft isnt at their core about the gaming, they just want to own the living room (no problem with that, again to each their own) they want to have the ultimate entertainment center. If they need games they'll pay someone with creativity to do it. Sony was the first to introduce this concept but never put outside entertainment ahead of games. Microsofts success is due to Xbox Live and market saturation and Kinect Halo, Gears, and COD. Sony will be remembered this gen for being in third but ending the generation with the respect of gamers. As E3 has shown, Microsoft doesnt care about gamer respect, even though they wouldnt mind having it. All the money in the world and they think XBLA will save them. On the business end of things its smarter, but they've lost the respect they gained in 2005-2008 from a lot of gamers. Hell, even I am switching to PC next generation because of Microsoft.



happydolphin on 09 August 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Microsofts situation/problem is creativity, not financials. It doesn't matter how much money Microsoft has, Microsoft has had to depend on third party because their first party lacking within two generations. Halo itself from its origin wasnt a first party game until Microsoft bought it. The best first party game Microsoft studios has created that stuck is probably Forza.

Microsoft isnt at their core about the gaming, they just want to own the living room (no problem with that, again to each their own) they want to have the ultimate entertainment center. If they need games they'll pay someone with creativity to do it. Sony was the first to introduce this concept but never put outside entertainment ahead of games. Microsofts success is due to Xbox Live and market saturation and Kinect Halo, Gears, and COD. Sony will be remembered this gen for being in third but ending the generation with the respect of gamers. As E3 has shown, Microsoft doesnt care about gamer respect, even though they wouldnt mind having it. All the money in the world and they think XBLA will save them. On the business end of things its smarter, but they've lost the respect they gained in 2005-2008 from a lot of gamers. Hell, even I am switching to PC next generation because of Microsoft.

Well let's be honest here, because of Valve ;)



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 09 August 2012
happydolphin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Microsofts situation/problem is creativity, not financials. It doesn't matter how much money Microsoft has, Microsoft has had to depend on third party because their first party lacking within two generations. Halo itself from its origin wasnt a first party game until Microsoft bought it. The best first party game Microsoft studios has created that stuck is probably Forza.

Microsoft isnt at their core about the gaming, they just want to own the living room (no problem with that, again to each their own) they want to have the ultimate entertainment center. If they need games they'll pay someone with creativity to do it. Sony was the first to introduce this concept but never put outside entertainment ahead of games. Microsofts success is due to Xbox Live and market saturation and Kinect Halo, Gears, and COD. Sony will be remembered this gen for being in third but ending the generation with the respect of gamers. As E3 has shown, Microsoft doesnt care about gamer respect, even though they wouldnt mind having it. All the money in the world and they think XBLA will save them. On the business end of things its smarter, but they've lost the respect they gained in 2005-2008 from a lot of gamers. Hell, even I am switching to PC next generation because of Microsoft.

Well let's be honest here, because of Valve ;)


I started this generation with an Xbox 360, Microsoft pushed me back towards Sony, Valve gave me a door to cut my ties with Microsoft for good while still having a Sony console. But much in the vein of the purpose of this post is Sonys motto which is IP's being the lifeblood of the industry.



kitler53 on 09 August 2012
happydolphin said:
Jay520 said:

If he's agreeing with me, then he's not referring to non-Sony fans; he's reffering to non-Sony talk. I think I should clarifiy that I'm not saying all non-Sony talk in Sony forums is bad. But in situations like this, where it's clearly a case of one party trying to belittle another company (for whatever reason), I don't like it.

And of course it happens to all forums as well.

Yeah, I wasn't personally belittling as you can tell from the civil convo with S.T.A.G.E. and Kitler. I just would like the same, that in Sony forums if belittling of Sony is not acceptable, than belittling of non-Sony wouldn't either. As such I was just taken aback by fusioncode's comment (not in an intense way, hense the short question "are you really that biased"). I didn't think the convo I was having with S.T.A.G.E. and Kitler was derailing if it is I will stop.

i thought your replys have been civil and such.

also, i pretty much agree with the bottom line of your reply to me above.  i especially agree with the part were you basically say nintendo hasn't been given credit for the new IPs that aren't for the gaming enthusist. 

I'll also add, however, that i think it is componded by how many unique franchises use the same cast of characters: 2D mario, 3D mario, mario kart, SSB, mario tennis, mario strikers, mario sluggers, mario party, paper mario, and i'll just though in mario and sonic as well.  sometimes it's easy to forget these really are distinct franchises.



kupomogli on 09 August 2012

So what does two game titles being trademarked have to do with the games themselves once released being good games?  Nothing.  It's just like if "insert random company here" releases a CG video of "x game."  Doesn't mean the game itself is going to be good, it just means it has a good looking CG video. 

I remember all the Dead Island hype based on just the announcement video, and while it's a good game, what did the announcement video have to do with it being good?  Just like these two trademarks.  Nothing.



Andrespetmonkey on 09 August 2012
pezus said:

Andrespetmonkey said:

Stawhawk isn't a new Ip, sorcery isn't out :P

Yes, it is ;o

Fuck... That went under the radar big time



My Music

happydolphin on 09 August 2012
kupomogli said:

So what does two game titles being trademarked have to do with the games themselves once released being good games?  Nothing.  It's just like if "insert random company here" releases a CG video of "x game."  Doesn't mean the game itself is going to be good, it just means it has a good looking CG video. 

I remember all the Dead Island hype based on just the announcement video, and while it's a good game, what did the announcement video have to do with it being good?  Just like these two trademarks.  Nothing

I think S.T.A.G.E. is just pointing out that these are new IPs. That's a good thing already.

The question as to what games these will be, you're right, is a different question. But I think it's valid to mention when one of the big 3 has a new IP or two up its sleeve, in a market where freshness of ideas is considered not necessary but important, not only for sales but also for longer lasting and genuine appeal.