By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
RexSad 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.

LOL What are you even talking about man? Sony has tons of first party games announced and already released many first party games. They had several ports last generation so that is nothing new and all companies are porting games si what point are you making? Most of Sony's games have been new games with more to come with. THey had plenty of sequels last generation too so once again, what are you even talking about?

BTW most of their PS3 games went platinum so you are wrong as usual. No need to downplay Sony's success to defend MS's failures lol. Sony had over 10 different franchises that sold over 1 million last generation so as the other poster said they had no problem selling games without MP.