By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
fluky-nintendy said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

The great thing Sony did in the last few years is that they DIDNT try and change the industry, and thats why they have a consistent and larger fanbase.

I'm not sure where the idea that change > improving on something people already love comes from. That might be the case once in a century, but other than than people have certain expectations.

 

They didn't try and change the industry? What about Heavy Rain, isn't that taking a huge risk in money to create something so odd for the time? And what about Jorney, AR with Eye Pet, upcoming Morpheus, Unfisnished Swan, the Pupeteer...And I could go on and on about telling you the risky games/moves Sony keeps doing over the years. Don't you try blur things up and deny.. it's pretty visible.


having options for niche markets =/= changing the industry.

Sony can afford to make all of those options available on the back of the shooters and other mainstream games which sell millions upon millions.

If sony were not selling those millions of mainstream games, they would not have the money to bother with niche markets. They clearly have the right balance. There was a good article a few days ago mentioning how only 4/10 playstation games make money and how they have to shuffle profits and budgets between projects. You should read it.

Nintendo on the other hand are hardly making anything from the biggest titles in the industry (whose to blame for it is another story), but are continuing to make games theres low demand for. They dont have the cushion for failure MS or Sony do. If none of Sony's first party games make any money, they will still earn a lot of money from games like watch dogs, assassins creed, GTA, COD, BF, FIFA and tons of others, but if nintendo's games dont make money, they have very little to fall back on.