IGN: Why Sony won E3

[makingmusic476]

Michael-5 said:

NYANKS said:

scottie said:

leatherhat said:

scottie said:
IGN: Why PS3 won E3

Because we refuse to admit the existence of Nintendo, and because Sony's was slightly better than Microsoft's.

People can debate who won between sony and nintendo but the fact is sony showed more exclusives (but still barely any) and the wii U underwhelmed. It was a bust of an E3.

Indeed, people can debate it, and I will debate with anyone who actually made an honest assesment, which includes everyone posting in this thread, but does not include IGN writers.

 

Sony always show more exclusives than the others because they show games a long way ahead of time. What you saw at E3 was Sony's exclusives for the next 3-4 years and Nintendos for 1-2. The fact that you are more used to companies that announce years in advance is why you think the Wii U underwhelmed. This E3, they announced that the 3DS will have a bigger lineup than any console has ever had in its first year, barring the Wii's (Wii Sports and Wii Play alone make the Wii's lineup the biggest). Next year, they shall talk about the Wii U. Saying that the Wii U underwhelmed is as ridiculous as saying that the PS4 underwhelmed.

Wait, what games did Sony show that were 3 or 4 years away?  Everything seemed rather close, like 1 or maybe 2.

This E3, Sony didn't announce games 3-4 years in advance (and I think it's because the PS4 is comming). However Sony usually announces games far in advance from Nintendo and Microsoft.

Microsoft almost never announces a game more then 2 years in advance (Halo 4 is just over a year, Forza 4 was less then a year, Forza 3 was like 4 months, and Gears 2 was about 8 months, etc).

Nintendo is similar. The games Nintendo announces the most in Advance are Zelda, and Smash Bros. Even Zelda, at best Nintendo gives 2 years warning.

For Sony, Killzone 2 was announced 5 years before release. Same with GT5, and The Last Guardian was actually delayed by 2 years, nevermind when it was announced.

BAck to the topic at hand, I still feel Nintendo won. Yea Sony announced more 1st party games, but that's because PS Vita just debuted. Nintendo announced more games in general (over 10 for Wii U), and a lot of Nintendo's featured games are bigger in magnitude then Sony's.

I don't understand how this myth is still perpetuated.

Around the beginning of a generation, projects are announced early in development.  As the generation progresses, and development cycles shorten and publishing line-ups swell, games are then announced closer to release.  This is equally true for both Sony and Microsoft.

Yes, Killzone 2 was announced four (yes, four - not five) years prior to release, as was Gran Turismo 5 (are you intentionally ignoring the release of Prologue?), but the same can be said for games like Lost Odyssey, Banjo & Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts, and Alan Wake, all of which were announced in 2005-2006, yet none of which came out until 2008-2010.  In fact, Alan Wake had a longer development cycle than any of the PS3 games you mentioned.

On the other hand, sequels to franchises that have already seen releases in a generation are generally announced closer to release.  Gears 2 and Fable 3 were released around a year after their initial announcement, as you pointed out, and the same can be said for Killzone 3, LittleBigPlanet 2, Infamous 2, MotorStorm: Apocalypse, and Socom 4, all of which were announced in the first half of 2010 and released over the first half of 2011.  Then there's Resistance 2 and MotorStorm: Pacific Rift, which were announced at the start of 2008 and released that very same year, as well as Uncharted 2 in 2009.  And there's Twisted Metal, which was announced at last year's E3 conference, and is set to release in October.

Of course, there are exceptions when it comes to new IPs.  For example, Ryse was announced at Microsoft's conference last year, and it's looking like a late 2012 title.  Same goes for Sony and the Last Guardian.