By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
logic56 on 31 March 2012
Edit Thread
RolStoppable said:
logic56 said:

so after much much looking and confirming (believe me it was a tough job doing all this looking and confirming and stuff) I'm so  so soooo so sorry.....but I can't find a single goddamn line where I said it was going to dominate... I mean, wait hold up *goes back to look even harder* nope so umm yeah...I have no idea what the hell your talking about, and remember this is after trying really really hard to understand what you are talking about

and just for the hell of it

earlier in a reply to YOU:

"while I personally think the it has a chance to outsell the psp, it's just not positioned in the market to attract the casuals (children mostly) needed to make it sell more than the 3ds, barring the 3ds tanking for no good reason"

so not only did I not say it was going to dominate I know that it won't sell more than the 3ds, (kinda reminds me of arguments with my mom, which aren't arguments more like aggressive agreements)

but maybe you misunderstood so I'll say it again

the Vita will receive a lot of games the vast majority of these games will not be multimillion sellers, which is the same with all PlayStation consoles, and so your not confused, YOUR point was the same, only it insinuated that's that's NOT the norm for PlayStation console

and just to drive it home

THE PS2 AND PS1 WOULD NOT HAVE SOLD HALF OF WHAT THEY DID IF THE ONLY GAMES THEY RECEIVED WERE THE MULTIMILLION SELLERS!!!

The current point of contention is if it is Sony's usual modus operanti to establish its platforms by having lots of rather small games. That was your claim and I refuted it. Things that were said in different arguments aren't really relevant here.

The PS1 made a name for itself through games like Tekken 2, Crash Bandicoot, Final Fantasy VII and Gran Turismo which were released in either 1996 or 1997 (the Nintendo 64 launched in 1996/97). Subsequently Sony also garnered (timed) exclusivity for games like Tomb Raider 2 and Resident Evil 2.

The PS2 was propelled by the massive releases of Gran Turismo 3, Grand Theft Auto 3 and Metal Gear Solid 2 which were all available by the time the Xbox and GameCube launched.

So no, Sony's M.O. wasn't a sheer mass of exclusive games like you claimed, rather their platforms were spearheaded by huge sellers (defined as 5m and above).

PlayStation dominance ended when Sony was unable or unwilling to execute their previous strategy. But to be clear, this isn't about dominance. It's about highlighting that Sony's M.O. wasn't the same across their four systems prior to the PSV.

*entire detailed post deleted for unforeseen reason*

short version:

of all the games you mentioned only 2 of them started out as a huge sellers when they were secured by Sony, GT and Crash (which were first party developed). Only 2 games were secured by Sony as exclusives on the pretense that they are huge sellers ALL of the others were small successes under 5 million

so yeah your wrong, Sony's goal is not to secure huge selling games but games and lots of them and that's it, some do better than others, but few if any are KNOWN to be huge sellers at the time they are secured for PlayStation platforms.

Don't believe me look it up, GTA, Final Fantasy, Tekken, Tomb Raider, etc ALL started out as regular modest success hell even Metal Gear (the one's that came BEFORE Solid)