By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mike_L on 07 March 2016
Edit Thread
Mr Puggsly said:
naruball said:

Can't believe you're the only person in this thread who gets it.

You can't compare well established Ninty franchises (Mario and Zelda, really?) with a new IP.

The genre also plays a huge part.

Bottom line is, with Single player games you can easily beat the game in a week and trade it off. The market is then flooded with second hand copies and that seriously hurts sales. There's a reason so many single player games had multiplayer that seemed to have come out of nowhere. Tomb Raider and God of War are prime examples.

Also, you are correct. For every successful Sony game, there are at least three that either didn't make a profit or possibly made a tiny one.

We are also at a point where we see many studios (1st party included) taking less risks and sticking with established IPs.

Sony for example got a lot of praise for pumping out many IPs last gen. This just gen we're seeing a much heavier reliance on 3rd parties, less big budget 1st party developed games, and more remasters to bolster the library. But I don't complain because I understand the risks and know many of those PS3 releases didn't pay off.

What have happened to you Puggsly? I've been away for only 7 months and now I find myself agreeing with you and even admire the way you argue.

You're right about SCE taking far less risks this gen compared to the last and while that is understandable they have to keep experimenting and take risks. Because that's what me and many other gamers liked about them last gen. You will have some misses but eventually strike gold and get a hit.

For me, the many quality exclusives on PS3 is the sole reason why it was able to compete with (and eventually overtake) my 360 that had both superior OS, online and controller imo.

Luckily 2016 looks to be great for every platform.