Quantcast
Sony's E3 2019 happened without You Noticing (Engadget )

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Sony's E3 2019 happened without You Noticing (Engadget )

Tagged games:

What do you think

Sony is Ninja 10 52.63%
 
Kaz hirai lurking and lau... 9 47.37%
 
Total:19

Death stranding, Last of us 2, ghost of tsushima..... + FF7 remake being a PS4 timed exclusive.
Every major 3rd party releaseing games also on the PS4.

Sony are fine without E3 this year.
The FF7R being a PS4 timed exclusive is HUGE, it was the single best showing from E3.

To me this beat everything MS showed lol.



Number of days to reach 50M from 40M : 198 days
Number of days to reach 60M from 50M : 187 days
Number of days to reach 70M from 60M : 175 days
Number of days to reach 80M from 70M : 227 days

Necro-bump this 2020: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=229249

Around the Network

Na...hope u jokin.



FloatingWaffles said:
HollyGamer said:

1. That's the point only Sony made sales during E3

2.Did we discussing about Nintendo ??? We are talking about Sony here 

3.Did Microsoft skipping E3 ??? We are talking about Sony

4. AMD clearly said their Navi are coming to PS5, yes it's shocking 

5. Microsoft indeed create the buzz first from last year,   but it has been replaced by Sony with Wired interview and a couple of early rumor , while followed by Microsoft yesterday by copying what Sony said from Wired interview  and it didn't work well, because unlike last year Microsoft does not create a buzz marketing words and jsut telling what Sony did tell to Wire.com 

6.

7. That's the point, even without attending E3, Sony knew Square will shows the games.  

Did you even read what I replied? 

1) No, Sony has never been the only one to make sales during E3. Everyone does, Xbox and Nintendo have ones going right this very second, even Steam has a thing for E3 live announcements right now, and Valve isn't at E3. So how is Sony having a sale somehow a special thing compared to the others that gives them a secret benfit but nobody else? 

2) I mentioned Nintendo because according to this video and your description that Sony simply having a State of Play not too long ago created buzz before E3. If we're going by a logic where announcing any info through ANY form is considered being at E3, then that means Nintendo (due to having multiple directs per year) has multiple E3's, and Microsoft has E3 every month due to Inside Xbox. So saying "well they created buzz" once again doesn't have anything to do with E3 nor does it mean they were there but in secret.

3) Once again, you said the 3rd reason was that all the multiplats are indirectly and directly promoting Sony as if that lends more credence to the idea that this was some secret master plan that Sony had and was actually at E3 because of it, but those happen REGARDLESS of whether Sony would be there or not. If Sony is at E3, those multiplats are still shown. Even if they're not, those aren't gonna magically disappear. It's an irrelevant point to bring up that adds nothing.

4) AMD is the provider for Playstation so of course, if given the go ahead, they are gonna talk about it. 

5) If the argument for this one is "well Sony got the info out first so by the time Microsoft said theirs it didn't feel new anymore and felt like a repeat of what Sony said", then I dunno what to tell you man. While it was a smart move for Sony to release their info like that (since Microsoft's was lame as fuck regardless, hate those "videos of people talking about specs" things", it doesn't mean Microsoft copied. It just means they have similar capable specs. And just because Sony got theirs out first doesn't mean there's no buzz for Microsoft's at all now. 

6) ?

7) It's not just that Sony knew that, the game was gonna be shown regardless. So why are you treating it as if it was a part of some master plan when in all likelihood it was always gonna be shown whether Sony was at E3 or not. Again, just like the multiplats, it's an irrelevant point. Sure, you could argue "well Sony still got advertising", but still.

Oh well, I suppose we can just agree to disagree. I still think the video is heavily reaching though. Sony still got advertising from E3 in some avenues yes, but again that was gonna happen regardless of whether they want or not in the same way it would happen for Nintendo or Microsoft regardless of if they went or not, but I highly doubt it was because this was some master plan like they are trying to imply. 

You are talking to much but ended up agree LOL.

For Nintendo Exception for direct play ,  It will be a different story when it come to  Nintendo, because Not all third party games coming to  Nintendo so Not all third party representing Nintendo , in fact Nintendo always the one promoting an old third party port that come to Switch 

Microsoft will be close to Sony scenario if they are not intending E3 , but the have less surprise moment, games and exclusives that not worth to hype. And their fan base is smaller than Sony. Especially this gen where Sony got more third party deals and exclusives and benefit of having more sales and getting more beter treatment from third party developer. But i say it's close

But with this Sony save a hell a lot of money while still gain promotion and marketing for their console.



HollyGamer said:
FloatingWaffles said:

Did you even read what I replied? 

1) No, Sony has never been the only one to make sales during E3. Everyone does, Xbox and Nintendo have ones going right this very second, even Steam has a thing for E3 live announcements right now, and Valve isn't at E3. So how is Sony having a sale somehow a special thing compared to the others that gives them a secret benfit but nobody else? 

2) I mentioned Nintendo because according to this video and your description that Sony simply having a State of Play not too long ago created buzz before E3. If we're going by a logic where announcing any info through ANY form is considered being at E3, then that means Nintendo (due to having multiple directs per year) has multiple E3's, and Microsoft has E3 every month due to Inside Xbox. So saying "well they created buzz" once again doesn't have anything to do with E3 nor does it mean they were there but in secret.

3) Once again, you said the 3rd reason was that all the multiplats are indirectly and directly promoting Sony as if that lends more credence to the idea that this was some secret master plan that Sony had and was actually at E3 because of it, but those happen REGARDLESS of whether Sony would be there or not. If Sony is at E3, those multiplats are still shown. Even if they're not, those aren't gonna magically disappear. It's an irrelevant point to bring up that adds nothing.

4) AMD is the provider for Playstation so of course, if given the go ahead, they are gonna talk about it. 

5) If the argument for this one is "well Sony got the info out first so by the time Microsoft said theirs it didn't feel new anymore and felt like a repeat of what Sony said", then I dunno what to tell you man. While it was a smart move for Sony to release their info like that (since Microsoft's was lame as fuck regardless, hate those "videos of people talking about specs" things", it doesn't mean Microsoft copied. It just means they have similar capable specs. And just because Sony got theirs out first doesn't mean there's no buzz for Microsoft's at all now. 

6) ?

7) It's not just that Sony knew that, the game was gonna be shown regardless. So why are you treating it as if it was a part of some master plan when in all likelihood it was always gonna be shown whether Sony was at E3 or not. Again, just like the multiplats, it's an irrelevant point. Sure, you could argue "well Sony still got advertising", but still.

Oh well, I suppose we can just agree to disagree. I still think the video is heavily reaching though. Sony still got advertising from E3 in some avenues yes, but again that was gonna happen regardless of whether they want or not in the same way it would happen for Nintendo or Microsoft regardless of if they went or not, but I highly doubt it was because this was some master plan like they are trying to imply. 

You are talking to much but ended up agree LOL.

For Nintendo Exception for direct play ,  It will be a different story when it come to  Nintendo, because Not all third party games coming to  Nintendo so Not all third party representing Nintendo , in fact Nintendo always the one promoting an old third party port that come to Switch 

Microsoft will be close to Sony scenario if they are not intending E3 , but the have less surprise moment, games and exclusives that not worth to hype. And their fan base is smaller than Sony. Especially this gen where Sony got more third party deals and exclusives and benefit of having more sales and getting more beter treatment from third party developer. But i say it's close

But with this Sony save a hell a lot of money while still gain promotion and marketing for their console.

I literally said I don't agree lmao, this entire thing is still pure reaching and I think all the reasons they gave completely destroy it 

if you wanna convince yourself of this then go ahead bud, you do you, we can just agree to disagree



FloatingWaffles said:
HollyGamer said:

You are talking to much but ended up agree LOL.

For Nintendo Exception for direct play ,  It will be a different story when it come to  Nintendo, because Not all third party games coming to  Nintendo so Not all third party representing Nintendo , in fact Nintendo always the one promoting an old third party port that come to Switch 

Microsoft will be close to Sony scenario if they are not intending E3 , but the have less surprise moment, games and exclusives that not worth to hype. And their fan base is smaller than Sony. Especially this gen where Sony got more third party deals and exclusives and benefit of having more sales and getting more beter treatment from third party developer. But i say it's close

But with this Sony save a hell a lot of money while still gain promotion and marketing for their console.

I literally said I don't agree lmao, this entire thing is still pure reaching and I think all the reasons they gave completely destroy it 

if you wanna convince yourself of this then go ahead bud, you do you, we can just agree to disagree

The fact that Nintendo lack third party developer support  less exclusives on Xbox proves that both of them are really different from Sony and need E3 more then Sony. 



Around the Network

I think alot of you dont understand the importance of marketing and publicly. Cyberpunk has just been heavily marketed on X1 which is generating buzz for Xbox not PS4 eithen through we know its coming to PS4. The fact Sony wasnt there to show it off benefits there opposition, just like how Destiny and COD were marketed for PS4.
FF7 is also coming to other platforms same as Cyberpunk so if thats a win for Sony than its a win for PC since thats getting everything aswell.

Of course Sony are going to announce system sales etc. Heck Xboxs event was finished days ago and there still making announcements like that.

I think this entire thread is reaching thinking Square a company Sony doesnt own and FF7 a game Sony doesnt own or make is a win. Not being at E3 would be due to other reasons.

5o say Sony has a great E3 showing because of Square is.. well facepalming in my book.



Azzanation said:

I think alot of you dont understand the importance of marketing and publicly. Cyberpunk has just been heavily marketed on X1 which is generating buzz for Xbox not PS4 eithen through we know its coming to PS4. The fact Sony wasnt there to show it off benefits there opposition, just like how Destiny and COD were marketed for PS4.
FF7 is also coming to other platforms same as Cyberpunk so if thats a win for Sony than its a win for PC since thats getting everything aswell.

Of course Sony are going to announce system sales etc. Heck Xboxs event was finished days ago and there still making announcements like that.

I think this entire thread is reaching thinking Square a company Sony doesnt own and FF7 a game Sony doesnt own or make is a win. Not being at E3 would be due to other reasons.

5o say Sony has a great E3 showing because of Square is.. well facepalming in my book.

Yeah but since its timed exclusive, theres gonna be a half-year to a year wait before you ll see it other places.

And I bet Cyberpunk still ends up selling twice as much on playstation 4, as it does on xbox one.
also cyberpunk isnt a timed exclusive to xbox, it ll release day and date along side the PS4 version.

The same isnt true for Final Fantasy 7 Remake, so its not "the same" situtation, as you claimed above.



Number of days to reach 50M from 40M : 198 days
Number of days to reach 60M from 50M : 187 days
Number of days to reach 70M from 60M : 175 days
Number of days to reach 80M from 70M : 227 days

Necro-bump this 2020: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=229249

Nice guy Sony, as always.



JRPGfan said:

Yeah but since its timed exclusive, theres gonna be a half-year to a year wait before you ll see it other places.

And I bet Cyberpunk still ends up selling twice as much on playstation 4, as it does on xbox one.
also cyberpunk isnt a timed exclusive to xbox, it ll release day and date along side the PS4 version.

The same isnt true for Final Fantasy 7 Remake, so its not "the same" situtation, as you claimed above.

Its definity great having FF7 on your platform as its a legendary game however a timed exclusive on a game sold in parts isnt exactly a bad thing for there competitors either as once its released somewhere else, they will advertise it as the full game etc.

Cyberpunk will sell more on PS4 because of the sheer bigger userbase however marketing can do wonders and considering Cyberpunk will continue to be advistised as the superior choice on X is a good backing for a game like that.

Squars conference was great and ill rate it 2nd best under Nintendos showing since that was my personal favourite.



- Marketing is important.... but selling more consoles and games isn't, ok. Not to forget that selling more consoles also don't show who had more impact on marketing.



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