Forums - Sony Discussion - Report: Sony looking to acquire Metal Gear, Castlevania, and Silent Hill IP's from Konami, Kojima involvement planned

LivingMetal said:
Azzanation said:

Reality is a nice place to live in. Care to prove your point of creative freedom this gen?

Why start "this gen?"  Why not start since Microsoft acquired Bungie with the original Xbox when Alex Seropian left Bungie after creative differences?  And the rest of history as Runa216 already covered some of it since you make it so easy.  Also, Mojang makes more than just Minecraft, but employees were irate after Microsoft required them to concentrate on Minecraft.  Rare was used to push Kinect, not allowing them to continue a legacy they build with Nintendo.  And you have more developers who once worked exclusively with Microsoft and are now also working with Sony, but NOT the other way around such as Epic, Bungie, Remedy, Valve, etc. with projects outside of Microsoft's control.  Why do you think that there has been a more variety of titles for the PlayStation platform than the Xbox?  It's because Sony purposely allows a far less tighter control for those developers to make games that want and not heavily demanded by Microsoft in ALL GENS.  But you had to make it "this gen" to shape your narrow field of view of justification.  You're not fooling anyone but yourself. 

Just two corrections.

From what is know Rare choose to focus on Kinect because  they liked the novelty of it (and also let's not forget that almost anyone from Nintendo era was in the company anymore at that time).

And this creative freedom isn't even cut for this gen, at most the last third of it.



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

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
LivingMetal said:

Why start "this gen?"  Why not start since Microsoft acquired Bungie with the original Xbox when Alex Seropian left Bungie after creative differences?  And the rest of history as Runa216 already covered some of it since you make it so easy.  Also, Mojang makes more than just Minecraft, but employees were irate after Microsoft required them to concentrate on Minecraft.  Rare was used to push Kinect, not allowing them to continue a legacy they build with Nintendo.  And you have more developers who once worked exclusively with Microsoft and are now also working with Sony, but NOT the other way around such as Epic, Bungie, Remedy, Valve, etc. with projects outside of Microsoft's control.  Why do you think that there has been a more variety of titles for the PlayStation platform than the Xbox?  It's because Sony purposely allows a far less tighter control for those developers to make games that want and not heavily demanded by Microsoft in ALL GENS.  But you had to make it "this gen" to shape your narrow field of view of justification.  You're not fooling anyone but yourself. 

Just two corrections.

From what is know Rare choose to focus on Kinect because  they liked the novelty of it (and also let's not forget that almost anyone from Nintendo era was in the company anymore at that time).

And this creative freedom isn't even cut for this gen, at most the last third of it.

But however you want to define "creative freedom," at the very least Sony has allowed developers to make the decisions they need to make to fulfill the vision of a particular title.  That is in contrast to creating and directing a product to appeal to the widest commercial audience.



LivingMetal said:
DonFerrari said:

Just two corrections.

From what is know Rare choose to focus on Kinect because  they liked the novelty of it (and also let's not forget that almost anyone from Nintendo era was in the company anymore at that time).

And this creative freedom isn't even cut for this gen, at most the last third of it.

But however you want to define "creative freedom," at the very least Sony has allowed developers to make the decisions they need to make to fulfill the vision of a particular title.  That is in contrast to creating and directing a product to appeal to the widest commercial audience.

Yes, every thing we know points to almost total freedom for devs (and sure some closing studios due to it) to the point Sony seemly pushed SSM to try a different IP but accepted when they wanted to make another GoW, and several other similar cases (but we will have some know folks in VGC pretending that now Sony is mandating that their devs milk the IPs).



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

If true that's good news. Of course it would be best if it was multiplatform but looking at how Konami has treated it's IP's i'd say it would be a good move. Sony would do them better justice than Konami by far. I just wish Suikoden was included in that list as well.



Eric2048 said:
If true that's good news. Of course it would be best if it was multiplatform but looking at how Konami has treated it's IP's i'd say it would be a good move. Sony would do them better justice than Konami by far. I just wish Suikoden was included in that list as well.

Agreed on all counts. I just bought suikoden II and III on my vita (PS1 Classics) and I have to say, DAMN! 



I got it all, baby! 

PS4, Switch, WiiU, XBO, PC
Vita, 3DS, Android

Top 6 this generation: 
Bloodborne, Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, God of War, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Dark Souls III, Red Dead Redemption II

Around the Network
LivingMetal said:
Azzanation said:

Reality is a nice place to live in. Care to prove your point of creative freedom this gen?

Why start "this gen?"  Why not start since Microsoft acquired Bungie with the original Xbox when Alex Seropian left Bungie after creative differences?  And the rest of history as Runa216 already covered some of it since you make it so easy.  Also, Mojang makes more than just Minecraft, but employees were irate after Microsoft required them to concentrate on Minecraft.  Rare was used to push Kinect, not allowing them to continue a legacy they build with Nintendo.  And you have more developers who once worked exclusively with Microsoft and are now also working with Sony, but NOT the other way around such as Epic, Bungie, Remedy, Valve, etc. with projects outside of Microsoft's control.  Why do you think that there has been a more variety of titles for the PlayStation platform than the Xbox?  It's because Sony purposely allows a far less tighter control for those developers to make games that want and not heavily demanded by Microsoft in ALL GENS.  But you had to make it "this gen" to shape your narrow field of view of justification.  You're not fooling anyone but yourself. 

Why not include other gens?

Umm because that matter has been resolved. Meaning that they give creative freedom to devs. 

Honestly why are you trying to twist. We are talking about current not what MS was doing back in the DOS days.



Azzanation said:
LivingMetal said:

Why start "this gen?"  Why not start since Microsoft acquired Bungie with the original Xbox when Alex Seropian left Bungie after creative differences?  And the rest of history as Runa216 already covered some of it since you make it so easy.  Also, Mojang makes more than just Minecraft, but employees were irate after Microsoft required them to concentrate on Minecraft.  Rare was used to push Kinect, not allowing them to continue a legacy they build with Nintendo.  And you have more developers who once worked exclusively with Microsoft and are now also working with Sony, but NOT the other way around such as Epic, Bungie, Remedy, Valve, etc. with projects outside of Microsoft's control.  Why do you think that there has been a more variety of titles for the PlayStation platform than the Xbox?  It's because Sony purposely allows a far less tighter control for those developers to make games that want and not heavily demanded by Microsoft in ALL GENS.  But you had to make it "this gen" to shape your narrow field of view of justification.  You're not fooling anyone but yourself. 

Why not include other gens?

Umm because that matter has been resolved. Meaning that they give creative freedom to devs. 

Honestly why are you trying to twist. We are talking about current not what MS was doing back in the DOS days.

Couple posts back you were concerned about FF starting on Nintendo 30 years ago (even if it became mainly a PS game on the last 20+ years) or MGS confusion. Now it only matters what happened on the last couple years? By that account then all these games that haven't released in over 5 years are ok to go to Sony.



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

DonFerrari said:
Azzanation said:

Why not include other gens?

Umm because that matter has been resolved. Meaning that they give creative freedom to devs. 

Honestly why are you trying to twist. We are talking about current not what MS was doing back in the DOS days.

Couple posts back you were concerned about FF starting on Nintendo 30 years ago (even if it became mainly a PS game on the last 20+ years) or MGS confusion. Now it only matters what happened on the last couple years? By that account then all these games that haven't released in over 5 years are ok to go to Sony.

Do you agree or disagree with MS giving creative freedom to devs currently?



Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

Couple posts back you were concerned about FF starting on Nintendo 30 years ago (even if it became mainly a PS game on the last 20+ years) or MGS confusion. Now it only matters what happened on the last couple years? By that account then all these games that haven't released in over 5 years are ok to go to Sony.

Do you agree or disagree with MS giving creative freedom to devs currently?

To Rare? I have said that even Kinect was their choice.

And you, are you going to consider the important timeframe is the present? Or current gen? Or if it fits you then 30 years ago is more important?



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

DonFerrari said:
Azzanation said:

Do you agree or disagree with MS giving creative freedom to devs currently?

To Rare? I have said that even Kinect was their choice.

And you, are you going to consider the important timeframe is the present? Or current gen? Or if it fits you then 30 years ago is more important?

Mate its an easy question. Current means now not 30 years a ago.

Let me put it this way.. If Sony wasnt giving creative freedom to devs last gen does that mean they arent doing it now?