Jo21 said:
izaaz101 said:
With regards to new franchises, I believe that Sony is forced to create new franchises to survive, whereas Nintendo can take their time to create new ones, since they can reuse old ones. How can Nintendo reuse old ones, while Sony can't? Because Sony releases sequels far too soon.
Take, for example, the main platformer for both consoles: Mario and Ratchet. How often do you see a new Ratchet platformer? Pretty much every year. Mario usually only comes out once every generation.
With Ratchet coming out every year, the fans of Ratchet will begin to anticipate it less, and less and become less excited for each new release. At some point, Sony will deem it an unprofitable IP, and retire it, or sell it off (a la Crash). Nintendo doesn't have that problem, as the sequels for most of their series are a few years apart, which ensures that fans of the series are still excited for each and every new entry into the series, whether it be Mario, Zelda or Metroid.
I also don't understand why only "hardcore" franchises only count when looking at new franchises. I also don't see what the other 4 points have to do with game development directly. |
it's better that way, we get better and fresher ideas each time and new characters, if sony were like nintendo crash would be still around a marvelous game like LBP would have never happen, it was too risky.
|
That's a very big IF mate. First of all, LBP might have been created regardless.
Secondly, I could turn around the argument. If Sony was more like Nintendo, Crash might have actually still been good and relevant, like Mario is.
Promoting Lesbianism --> 
