Why does Sony fail at making another mega franchise?

[Michael-5]

VXIII said:

RolStoppable said:

Rpruett said:

This had better be a joke. 

It's not even remotely accurate in most accounts.  Do you think that Gears of War was the first third person shooter?   Or that Devil May Cry was the first 'slash em up' ?    Killzone followed Halo but Halo followed a myriad of other games.

Gran Turismo certainly wasn't the first racing game.

Little Big Planet did sell well, but not spectacular.  Yet NSMB Wii sold spectacular.  Why?   Little Big Planet had rights to the multi-player / platformer far before it did.     Heavy Rain is a one of a kind type of gameplay experience.

My post must have hit a nerve, because it keeps getting quoted. What I got out of this thread is that the most favorite explanation as to why Sony doesn't have more mega franchises is due to Sony sucking at marketing their games. That reasoning isn't sound, but it does what it is supposed to do: protect the games. In other words, there's nothing wrong with the games.

But the games themselves are the problem. None of them with the exception of Gran Turismo are really genre-defining, so nothing that Sony makes becomes huge. Their games usually borrow elements from already popular games. Sure, Sony's games are polished, but they lack the wow-factor of offering something new. This isn't a Sony only problem, it holds true for pretty much every major publisher in the entire industry.

Now I'll address some of the things you said.

Do I think that GeoW was the first TPS? I said that it redefined its genre. If that isn't clear enough, in order to redefine a genre, games of that kind have to exist already. So no, I don't think that GeoW was the first TPS. Devil May Cry wasn't the first of its kind either, but it made its genre popular years before GoW. Halo changed the FPS genre on consoles and other games still take inspirations from it to this very day. Killzone brought nothing new to the table, at least not anything that other developers would be eager to imitate.

Gran Turismo redefined its genre, no other racing simulation before it offered so many licensed cars. So games that do something outstanding have a chance to become mega franchises while games that do not have no chance. Since Sony mostly uses ideas that have been done before and polishes them up, their games just sell well, but not spectacular.

NSMB Wii would have sold more than ten million copies even if it had only two players taking turns like previous games of the series. This franchise was already huge and had an amazing track record. What LBP had going for it was the extensive level editor, but as I already said in another post in this thread, most gamers aren't interested in building their own levels. And LBP as a platformer is really not that good of a game as anyone who has played platformers during their golden era on the 8- and 16-bit consoles will most likely confirm. Heavy Rain is unique, but never had any massmarket appeal. For what it is, it did very well commercially and exceeded everyone's expectations.

I really  don't want to get involved in this battle but .. you aware that every GOW game has outsold DMC game right?

you think Devil may cay "redefined" it's genre and not God of war, doesn't that make your logic fail ?

Devil May Cry 2.78  VS God of war 3.73 ( let alone the collection which sold 1.44 )

DMC2 1.82  VS GoW2 3.13

DMC3 1.93 and 0.05 VS GoW3 2.93

DMC4 1.31  1.25  VS Gow3 2.93 ( again ) , Gow shall hit 3.4 by the end of the year btw.

You can't really define what " redefine " is you know , for example I could say That Geow" is more or less just another TPS game with a couple of new ideas " right ? , that such a twisted logic you're using .

And what about games like Metal gear , Ico , shadow of colossus, Twisted Metal , Mag  ? " just another "genre" game with a couple of new ideas ? 

Ah what about MW2 did it r.......... you know what , I guess I got my point clear XD

Please dear sir when people disagree with you doesn't mean that your "post must have hit a nerve" , it's a matter of opinions after all and everybody have the right to disagree.

I don't think that I'll take this any further . -_-

I agree with RolStoppable. In the past Sony has really made some genre defining, or redefining games, but this generation not so much.

VXIII I agree with you on God of War, that game redefined the genre, but not mainly with it's gameplay, with it terific plot, gory battles (I mean ripping a head off!?!), and topless sex depicting cut scenes. Then again, this is one of PS3's best selling games, already selling 3 million units. Thats more then any Action game I know.

Metal Gear Solid is also genre defining, but thats the best selling PS3 exclusive, and has been among the best selling exclusives on a Sony console since the franchise started.

Twisted Metal also used to be big on the PS1 era, I'm a big fan of the franchise, but Sony butchered the series when they released "Small Brawl", and as a PS2 game, Twisted Metal Black didn't offer much (outside of the amazing cinematics). The PS3 version looks very cheap as well, why does an entire building fall when you shoot the corner? The physics and gameplay engine are simply too dated, and Sony hasn't really put enough $$$ into Twisted Metal since the PS1 titles.

As for ICO, Shadow of the Colosus, and Heavy Rain those are fairly niche games. Why didn't Mass Effect, Lost Odyssey, Alan Wake or better yet Baten Kaitos sell well? Amazing games, just poorly marketed, and they appeal to a smaller audience.

MAG was a concept, it was a game designed to show people that you can have smooth 256 player multiplayer on the PS3. What does that prove? More oponents doesn't mean better multiplayer, Gears of War 1 got away with 4 vs 4, and Halo 3 was limited to 32 players (I haven't played in a while, is this right?)? MAG didn't redefine anything.

Modern Warfare really defined realistic shooters, and by realistic I mean your not fighting Aliens, or a planet that doesn't exist. By real I mean your fighting using guns which simulate real guns, in environments which simulate real places, and battles which simulate potential wars (it's a game some fiction must be used). Modern Warfare 2 took off because many gamers missed Modern Warfare 1, or simply wanted more.

Basically, you can't blaime just marketing, there are other factors involved. Killzone is an awesome game, and it pushed the bar graphically on what the PS3 can do, but it doesn't look that much better then Gears of War 2, and the Plot is not that different from older FPS games, it's not that different from Halo. Gears of War was the first amazing third person shooter. Yes there was Kill Switch beforehand, but that was a glitchy game with a mediocre story. Halo was epic in 2001, and in 2004 it defined online console gaming.

As for LittleBigPlanet, yes it came out before New Super Mario Bros Wii, but Super Mario Bros is a 20 year old franchise, that defined platforming, and a new game after what about 20 years? THATS EPIC! I know people who don't play games who wanted a Wii for this thing because of nostalgia.

Sony makes some great games on the PS3, there is no doubt about that. However, I already forgot the Plot to Resistance 1, yet I still remember what happened in Halo 1, and going back further I still remember all the environments and level layouts to Donkey Kong Country. I cannot say that about Sonic, which was also a great game.