| 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. |
Ludicrous speed posted a much larger and more expansive list.
We agree that IP fatigue can be a thing, but I don't agree that what they are doing is better overall game wise. I think that funding can still be put into AA experiences that are not surrounding the larger IP's to prevent IP fatigue. They can even use older IP's if they don't want too much of a risk (e.g. a Jak and Daxter game for the PS5 could take less resources and money to develop overall than a new Uncharted game).
You can argue about the business decision, but, as I mentioned before, there are other factors besides the focus on AAA that increased their profits (namely their two competitors dropping the ball in significant ways). The PS4 was sold at only a very slight loss that was made up by buying just one game. Meanwhile, the PS3 was sold at a significant loss (some estimates as high as $200 during the launch period). They just aren't like for like scenarios. Clearly the software is a success and clearly they've made a lot of money with the PS4. Is that a result of their tactics? IDK, if the situations were a bit more similar it'd be easier to analyze.
I'm not sure what you meant when you said "no legacy whatsoever". What do you regard as legacy? They had the two best selling home consoles ever and created numerous new IP's which they still own and some are being made today (Ratchet and Clank, God of War).
I don't think Nintendo will be obliterated by the "future of gaming" as you put it. If having a legacy of iconic games prevents obliteration...Nintendo is at the top of the list of being saved. Their games are the most iconic of all time.
