fps_d0minat0r said:
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. |
Yes I understand what you're saying now. Making both innovation/mainstream is complicated these days and I have to agree that Nintendo does that better than the other platforms. Kinect falls into that category too. It feels like Nintendo has an adicional urge to be more experiementational because of that lack of an oxigen ballon like you say ~ 3rd party support and FPSs/GTAs.