ARamdomGamer said:
setsunatenshi said:
What world do you live in that you're comparing brand loyalty to a first party gaming company that has a legacy of 3rd party exclusives or de facto exclusives (like Metal Gear, Castlevania SOTN, FF7, etc) and for close to 30 years cultivates an audience that is a fan of said games, to random (insert DVD maker brand here) which functions as a tool to simply play some physical media?
People that have a console of preference, do so because of the legacy of said console and the fact their tastes are catered to. If your preferences lie in the Xbox side of things, I'd be surprised if you didn't like at least 2 of the 3 (Halo, Gears, Forza). So it's obvious the divide comes from the different tastes in software being made available. If any person that's primarily an Xbox gamer really misses the type of titles available on the PS side, they would have bought a Playstation in addition to their Xbox. It's as simple as that.
So, if you (general you) are a gamer that has nostalgia for the type of experiences Konami used to put out, you're probably more catered to on Sony's side of things. So the option being Sony possibly reviving these franchises or them staying dormant in some Konami vault behind the pachinko machines, what's the question here?
|
With the logic of resonance of IPs, then the one that should go for Castlevania is Nintendo.
There is more to vania than SotN, and games of that style have 6 exclusive titles across the GBA and DS.
|
I actually agree with this. Castlevania does feel like a Nintendo property more than anything else. MGS and Silent Hill definitely feels more Sony.