BMaker11 said:
I see it a little bit differently. I see it as the lack of M$ having a first party, so they tried to snag up every game that made the Sony brand popular so they could say "Look, we have these games too! You can buy Xboxes now!". They took the easy route instead of investing in their first party. Now Sony's games aren't replacements, but rather new gems. And what does M$ have? Games that the PS3 has also.... Putting all companies into perspective, Phil Harrison said it best 4 years ago, I believe: "Nintendo relies too much on their first party, Microsoft relies too much on the third parties, but Sony has a great mix of both as to appeal to just about everyone" (Funny because Nintendo is the one supposedly appealing to everyone nowadays, but you catch the drift) |
My point was that the games most defining of the Playstation brand were not owned or operated by Sony themselves, so once they stopped being exclusives, Sony lost a chunk of it's identity as it's console and the Xbox 360 started to look remarkably similar. The reasons for this happening, whether it be rising developments costs or conspiracy plots involving big bags of money, are irrelevant. The point is why their first party titles haven't plugged in the gap, and I gave my explanation. If this topic were about Microsoft, I would take this from their perspective.
Microsoft's original strategy had very little to do with matching the PS2's strategy. It consisted more with bringing a PC-like experience to a console and generally continue following Sega's lead. Microsoft really didn't employ a Me too approach until they created Forza Motorsport. That was understandable though. Sony's strategy worked and Gran Turismo was the flagship along with GTA, which they only needed to cut the exclusivity agreement. Microsoft was smart to employ a Me too approach because they were tapping into 120 million PS2 owners' wants. Sony was tapping into a 23 million fanbase by appealing to Microsoft's audience.
Now coming into the PS3, Sony looked away from their own success and looked towards what was working on the Xbox and Xbox 360. Sony had not locked their previous fanbase into a FPS loving audience the way the Microsoft fanbase had, so running your console launch around an unproven FPS (when you already have a franchise in place to top it off) was a sign that Sony understood their competitions' fanbase better than their own. Resistance ended up selling because of a general lack of software, but it's sequel pointed out to everyone that very many were not left with a good enough taste to come back. Where was the strong Japanese developed lineup? Where were the RPGs? Now Sony is two FPS deep and almost everything they come out with has online multiplayer nowadays. That was Microsoft's original strategy. Look at the title's that were Me toos to Sony's own first party titles. Motorstorm was ATV Off Road Fury. Heavenly Sword was God of War. These were all in the first year, when the only real known franchise from Sony still coming in was Ratchet and Clank.
Now look at some successful franchises Sony had on the PS2 and their status:
1. Gran Turismo-Took way too long to come out. Still looking at a May-June 2010 release for western shores and March for Japan.
2. EyeToy series-Sony came out with a replacement for the PS3, created one total retail game that came packaged and was ridiculously niche in nature, and then completely abandoned it.
3. SOCOM-Sony handed it off to a different developer, cut features and the game came out in absolute ruins.
4. God of War-Finally coming out in March.








