Sony: We Should Probably Develop Less Games

[theprof00]

Ail said:

happydolphin said:

Ail said:
Now not every title can be a must buy franchise and that's totally fine.

So here's where I mostly disagree. A good portion of 1st-party titles or exclusives should be must-haves. It was like that for the PS2, and that's one of the reasons why it was so successful. The question is, what happened?

Sure, some titles can be A or just good to haves, but as a manufacturer they should have must-haves so as to not dominated by MS like this. How a company can mainly win on multi-plats beats me.

The thing is on a given year there's only room for 2 or so must have game for a first party. 

Add 3-4 must have third party games and you're up to 5-6 must have games a year. Add the fact that most players have a genre they prefer ( shooter, prg, sports, take your pick) and you're up to 7 or more games and that is already above what most gamers will buy in a year....

Release more must have and the must have start competing with each others and the overall result isn't actually a lot greater. 

Technically, you're agreeing. Sony should pare down. Have 4-6 franchises that each have games release every 2-3 years. On the side, pour a lot more development into the more casual niche devs like flower, fat princess, etc, so that you have games that don't compete with one another.

For example, with FPS, Sony really only needs one big IP either KZ or resistance or even maybe they're fine with uncharted even being a third person...because there is already so many musthaves in that area. Then with Racing, one in straight racing, one in karting. In platforming, well, at least have one, but ideally two to three since they are much cheaper to develop. With third person, GoW and uncharted. Get a solid puzzler. Get a solid RPG, get a solid JRPG.

Sony could be fine with just:

GoW
Uncharted
LBP
Twisted Metal (hopefully they pick it up again)
GT
Puzzler
Platformer (R&C? Or something different?)
RPG/JRPG
Music game