| RolStoppable said: 2. With this answer your argument is brought to its knees. While you chose to sarcastically acknowledge Nintendo's diversity, you had to acknowledge it nonetheless. You had no choice, because the facts contradict the point of view you tried to push in this thread. 3. What "building a strong first party lineup" means for an executive of a console manufacturer is a portfolio of titles that not only become household names, but also push hardware on a notable level. That's why I am talking about bestselling games, and in the context of this topic, it's really the only viable point of view. IPs that sell less than one million copies are routinely discontinued or put on a long hiatus by console manufacturers and Sony is no exception to this rule. |
1. I don't even know or care what you're doing here so I cut it out.
2. No. You seem to think if one game is slightly different from another then, bam, instant diversity. It doesn't work that way. Diversity means a range of different things. Mario Kart to Mario World to Super Mario Bros. is about as diverse as listing Fry Cook to Grill Cook at McDonalds as examples of diverse careers. Does Nintendo have some diversity? Of course. Do they cover a wide range of genres, aesthetics, tastes, and styles? Not as many as Playstation, which is the core of my argument.
3. I disagree with you completely. Having games in all different segments of the market has been Sony's strategy and it's worked pretty well, as they continue to create volume. Yoshida himself said that many Sony games don't turn a profit. They still make them, though, as all those different types of games benefit the platform itself.
“PlayStation platforms have been home for so many diverse, creative and innovative games from both first and third parties. That diversity, depth and breadth of games defined PlayStation,” muses Yoshida. http://www.gamesradar.com/yoshidas-fave-playstation-games/
