LurkerJ said:
Where is that much better consolidated list? Just curious. and I don't know how your point contradicts mine, we seem to agree? I always argued that Playstation exclusives weren't system sellers, and the Playstation brand had no identity besides "great third party support", and to me, SONY had no legacy whatsoever after 20 years of continued success with the PS1/PS2, this lack of legacy was exposed with the PS3, in fact, PlayStation battle royal embodied the PS brand perfectly well. I believe SONY's started to change that in the second half of the ps3 lifespan and during the PS4 era, which is a great business decision that they seem to be getting to get the hang of as of late. The PS5 will benefit from it, and if SONY continues to make up for the 20 years head start they wasted on AA games, they might just be able to save PS brand from being completely obliterated by the future of gaming (cloud services), like Nintendo surely will. |
That is quite true, less titles, more sales per title and each IP becoming more recognizeable. And yes although I liked All Stars it was a weak title.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."