By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
GOWTLOZ on 04 October 2017
Edit Thread
walsufnir said:
GOWTLOZ said:

Sega Saturn and 3DO never took off. PS1 was selling decently and was actually a viable alternative to Nintendo.

64dd add on came out only in Japan, in 1999, two years after FF VII released. Most games wouldn't have fit even on two N64 cartridges that could fit on just one PS1 disc. Also CD had way better audio output which was important in games like Metal Gear Solid. And after a while as Sony pulled ahead there was no need to consider developing for the N64 anyways. Business one o one.

Sony got in the industry for not holding back technology and developers like what Nintendo was doing.

Sony went deep pockets with PS1. They even bought Tomb Raider to not appear on other consoles back then. And they did it this gen with exclusive content for Destiny, "helped with developing SF5" and hurt VR as a whole when they bought timed exclusivity for BATMAN VR and RE7VR.

Sony didn't prevent most games from coming to other platforms. Tekken, Final Fantasy, Metal Gear Solid were on PS1 by the choice of their publishers. Same with Crash and Gran Turismo. As for Tomb Raider, you have any source?

SF5 wouldn't have been half as good without Sony's funding, they didn't fund MVCI and look how that game turned out.  Should I talk about MS doing the same with Dead Rising 3 and 4 hence preventing these games to come on PS4? Even if funding a game is considered a crime, MS did it first.

Then we have last generation. Do you not know about GTA EFLC timed exclusivity to Xbox? I'm sure you do. This cycle was perpetrated by MS and you know it damn well.

walsufnir said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Sony has more brand appeal in the world than Microsoft by default. They built up a high level name. Blu Ray is what theyve been invested in and now Microsoft is following. Third parties sell the most, but there are dry months to the year and Sony and Nintendo were wise to relocate theier games to correspond with those months opposed to the old fourth quarter when exclusives could survive. In Sonys case its worked. Microsoft hasnt had much to offer and without third party help they honestly dont have much in the tank for the rest of the gen. Sony covers the bases that they need to so that when they make deals outside of themselves they have all of their bases covered. Microsoft can make a great console with great online...but thats it. How they get their games does not show off how great they are as a developer. They acquired Halo and they acquired Gears. These are their two pillar franchises and both devs have nothing to do with them anymore. Think about it.

Many things come into play. Downplaying MS to a good console and online is true only nowadays. Remember the Halo 3 days? Sony only had GT back then, missing a mascot for many, many years. Halo was what actually sold consoles but yes, it's MS' fault they don't have a juggernaut this gen like Halo or Gears - well, they still have them but people moved on to different games, mainly 3rd party games. I even think Nintendo and Sony will be the last two pillars (at least I hope) to stand against the pay2win, pay2earn, service-type of games because it destroys how I grew up as a kid with a Master System - buy once, play forever. Games designed to be "finished", with a certain appeal. Not only to sell the game and making the most money of what people would like to spend money for.

But we will see if both keep the service crap out of their games.

Either way, I quit so I also won't participate anymore in this thread. But many people are just looking at many things way too simple, in my opinion.

Sony always had a mascot. Crash on PS1, Ratchet and Jak in the early years of PS2 and Kratos in the later years of PS2 and early years of PS3.