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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony's 1st party multiplayer fail

S.T.A.G.E. on 11 April 2014
Goatseye said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Goatseye said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Dude...Sony is fine and the big games always come within a two year window. I would be more worried about Microsoft if I were you when it comes to being creative and coming out with new exclusives themselves.

I'd rather take creativity of MS than Sony.

And here I'll tell you why:

Halo has been the benchmark for most FPS since 2001, it always had great visuals but it's gameplay took precedence over anything else. Thus, it's multiplayer is one of the most played in the industry.

Gears have also been the benchmark for all the TPS with cover based mechanic. Self explanatory.

MS released tons of Arcade games for the last 3 years through 1st party and external studios partnership.

I don't think any fans of Xbox should be worried about games on Xbox, be it 1st or 3rd party.

I'm not easily impressed by cinematic experience. It's a wow thing for 5 minutes.

MS has created zero games that have become a phenomenon. I have no clue what creativity you speak of. Yes, I agree that they are better at Sony at acquring IP's. 

I love Gears and Halo, but MS didn't create those games, they just own the IP to them. Every game MS has that I remotely like they've purchased. Gears, Halo and Rare titles. Everything I like about Sony they've made including partner games.

You just keep repeating the same old blabbers...

Same old blabber, which are historically true. Theres not a creative bone in MS no different from EA. 



Around the Network
Wright on 11 April 2014
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Same old blabber, which are historically true. Theres not a creative bone in MS no different from EA. 




Goatseye on 11 April 2014
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Same old blabber, which are historically true. Theres not a creative bone in MS no different from EA. 

I guess Forza is nothing, plus who the hell cares? The best TPS and FPS experiences last gen were on X360.

I'm dropping the mizzic bro. Done.



Shaunaka on 11 April 2014
Azzanation said:
EB1994 said:
Azzanation said:

I have to agree with the artical. Its the one reason why i stop buying Playstations after the 1st one. Sony games are just like 3rd party games to me, theres nothing really speacial about them other then them offerng another story to the library. I am a PC gamer and i did buy a 360 and a X1 however i only did so because of Halo and Gears. There games you will talk about for years and the community is so big on each game. Halo is one of my faverite franchises and it feels specials, it doesnt feel like just another shooter. Sony have alot of games however there franchises arent for everyone. Its the reason why PS Allstars failed because lets be honest, who really wants to play as Nathan Drake?

I just feel that Nintendo and Xbox franchises have more character to there heros and villians, there games become icons of gaming. Master Chief can appear in any game and get a crowd reaction same with Mario and Link, but you wouldnt react if you saw Sack Boy or the kid from Infamous... because the characters lack something thats really hard to pin point.

Sony need to start creating games that can offer simaler experinces to what Halo or a Mario game will offer. Becuase at the end of the day, while MS and Nintendo have the characters, Sony rely on 3rd party to offer those experinces but when you look at the bigger picture those games are most likely on Xbox aswell. So why would a gamer consider buying a PS4 for Destiny when X1 has Destiny and the next Halo? both expected to have a huge fan base and community.

Do you have any proof of this? Or just guessing?

Do i need proof? Its pretty obvious that his a cult hero among gamers. Everyone knows who he is.

LOL.

As is "that guy with the gun" from COD right?

You do actually need proof for such a statement since at least two people disagree with you at this point.



Shaunaka on 11 April 2014
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Same old blabber, which are historically true. Theres not a creative bone in MS no different from EA. 

I'm very curious...

I was lurking for quite some time before joining and I seem to remember that you were a vocal follower of MS at some point.

Is this correct? If so, what happened? If not - sorry to waste your time ;)



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 11 April 2014
Azzanation said:
GameAnalyser said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Goatseye said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Dude...Sony is fine and the big games always come within a two year window. I would be more worried about Microsoft if I were you when it comes to being creative and coming out with new exclusives themselves.

I'd rather take creativity of MS than Sony.

And here I'll tell you why:

Halo has been the benchmark for most FPS since 2001, it always had great visuals but it's gameplay took precedence over anything else. Thus, it's multiplayer is one of the most played in the industry.

Gears have also been the benchmark for all the TPS with cover based mechanic. Self explanatory.

MS released tons of Arcade games for the last 3 years through 1st party and external studios partnership.

I don't think any fans of Xbox should be worried about games on Xbox, be it 1st or 3rd party.

I'm not easily impressed by cinematic experience. It's a wow thing for 5 minutes.

MS has created zero games that have become a phenomenon. I have no clue what creativity you speak of. Yes, I agree that they are better at Sony at acquring IP's. 

I love Gears and Halo, but MS didn't create those games, they just own the IP to them. Every game MS has that I remotely like they've purchased. Gears, Halo and Rare titles. Everything I like about Sony they've made including partner games.

This.

Sorry to bust your bubble but Sony dont make games either, they own companies that make there games just like MS and Nintendo. Only games that Sony make are from SOE and most of them are sub par PC games. Nintendo are the only ones that make there big games from there head office in Japan like Mario and Zelda. MS find it cheaper to hire a 3rd party company to make there games then actrually own the company to make them. Seems logical.

The most importent part is if they own the IPs which MS own all there IPs just like Sony and Nintendo.

Um...you're wrong. Their games were made UNDER Sony. There was no before and after process of buying IPs. With Microsoft since their studios stunk up the place in their first gen dropped studios and in the next gen just decided third party was worth more. There are interviews with MS employees saying that first party is quite an investment (because they suck at it). They need already successful ideas to keep their heads above water hence why they bought Gears, kept Titanfall from Sony and bought Halo mid development. Microsoft knew about Titanfall well before it came out, They are masters of scouting other peoples games.

God of War was made by Sony Sanatamonica, SOTC and ICO were made by Sony Japan and Naughty Dog created products have been a creative extension of Sony. If you havent noticed Sony has always wanted to push games into movie/Pixar experiences since the early 90's. Sony has been with Naughty Dog as partners since most people on this site have been alive. Sucker Punch had always been trying to work closely with Sony much like Bungie was with Apple, but Sony did the smart thing. All of the partners who want in the Sony wheelhouse earn their way in even though Sony funds them. Sony doesnt want a bad investment. Unlike Microsoft, Sony focuses on CREATIVITY, which is why even though Infamous wasnt the hottest selling game ever the company learned how to make a Sony quality product. Yes...I said Sony quality product. If you look at Sony's games there is a style that is associated with them which transfers to other games, like Nintendo with their games, just more realistic. 



true_fan on 11 April 2014

I think the ps4 controller dictates they should just stay in the single player lane. XBOX will always be better than playstation in terms of multiplayer, the difference is XBOX has an opportunity to catch playstation in the single player titles, starting with Quantum Break.



TheBlackNaruto on 11 April 2014
true_fan said:
I think the ps4 controller dictates they should just stay in the single player lane. XBOX will always be better than playstation in terms of multiplayer, the difference is XBOX has an opportunity to catch playstation in the single player titles, starting with Quantum Break.


What do you mean with your first statement? Is something wrong with the PS4 controller or something?



The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...

PSN: StlUzumaki23

Shaunaka on 11 April 2014
Goatseye said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Dude...Sony is fine and the big games always come within a two year window. I would be more worried about Microsoft if I were you when it comes to being creative and coming out with new exclusives themselves.

I'd rather take creativity of MS than Sony.

And here I'll tell you why:

Halo has been the benchmark for most FPS since 2001, it always had great visuals but it's gameplay took precedence over anything else. Thus, it's multiplayer is one of the most played in the industry.

Gears have also been the benchmark for all the TPS with cover based mechanic. Self explanatory.

MS released tons of Arcade games for the last 3 years through 1st party and external studios partnership.

I don't think any fans of Xbox should be worried about games on Xbox, be it 1st or 3rd party.

I'm not easily impressed by cinematic experience. It's a wow thing for 5 minutes.

"Halo has been the benchmark for most FPS since 2001"

I believe it's lost that crown recently. Say of COD what you want, but it's much, much bigger than Halo. And the FPS market is filled to the brim with big games. It's not as big of a draw card anymore as it used to be.

"[Halo] always had great visuals"

Halo 3 and ODST had great visuals?

" but it's gameplay took precedence over anything else"

Just like every other FPS ever?

"Gears have also been the benchmark for all the TPS with cover based mechanic. Self explanatory."

How can you give MS credit for creativity when Gears was entirely an Epic product? A new studio is taking over the franchise now. The "creative" people who created Gears are making other stuff now. No point there I'm sorry.

"I'm not easily impressed by cinematic experience"

You think Sony is only publishing "cinematic" games? It's also such a vague definition that one could easily group Halo, Ryse, Alan Wake and maybe even Fable in there. Just because Uncharted and The Last of Us had a story doesn't mean the gameplay was bad. Literally only two games, Heavy Rain and Beyond from Quantic dream is a cinematic game in most people's books. And considering that you could take those two out of Sony's 1st party portfolio and it would still vastly exceed what MS has produced in the last 4 years then you really have no point at all.

I really want to hear your response, because your post was unbearably terrible in my opinion.

 

 

*disclaimer to anyone* I think Halo 4 was fantastic. Really impressed. 343 did an a-fuckin-mazing job.



true_fan on 11 April 2014
TheBlackNaruto said:
true_fan said:
I think the ps4 controller dictates they should just stay in the single player lane. XBOX will always be better than playstation in terms of multiplayer, the difference is XBOX has an opportunity to catch playstation in the single player titles, starting with Quantum Break.


What do you mean with your first statement? Is something wrong with the PS4 controller or something?

The alignment of the sticksand controller is why many call xbox the shooter console. Of course the many shooter games, but even many developers use xbox controllers during development as recent as the watch dogs and the division developers.