WilliamWatts said:
CGI-Quality said:
WilliamWatts said:
CGI-Quality said:
No PlayStation has ever had an attacthment rate as high as the 360's, if we want to get real technical. End of the day, it's irrelevant, the brand wasn't built on extremely high sellings IPs, but many IPs in general. In some instances, the PlayStation brand is still the biggest in the industry. It's just that in other areas (lots too) the brand has been significantly weakened by Sony's own errors, which they now have to work hard to rectify, but as of late, seem to be doing in spades.
That of course doesn't slight Nintendo's nor Microsoft's success at all this gen. Nintendo is particularly so successful because they followed nobody. Innovation was key, and it's something Sony (and perhaps to a lesser extent Micorosft) is now displaying as well.
As for which of the company's between Nintendo & Sony have the higher quality 1st Party software, that's all opinion. But neither is hurting in quality, and that's what matters.
|
Sony never had the means for getting an attach rate as high as the 360 or Wii. Its because they take the easy way out. Its easier to make a game focusing on a niche that it is to get a wide swathe of people to enjoy a game. Its easier to create a decent story and a decent gimmick than it is to truely craft a truely huge franchise. Gameplay is the hardest to craft which is one very good reason why they are as deserving of their current standing as Nintendo are. Nintendo are truely masters of the gameplay experience which is why they have so many games which sell so much and yet they cannot be copied. People play games, not movies.
As for brands it probably goes DS > Wii >>> Playstation >> PSP with Xbox being roughly equal to Playstation. You just keep telling yourself that the Playstation brand is the biggest but that was a long time ago.
Sony haven't done jack for innovation. What have they successfully innovated? Nothing really stands out as being grasped by the general public. Their biggest games have been clones or inspired by other games with the only exception being Gran Turismo which was innovation a couple of generations ago.
Nintendo has the highest quality 1st party developers. Sony have Jack. High quality developers create phenomenoms and Nintendo have: Wii Sports, Wii Fit, Mario Kart, Mario 2D or 3D, Nintendogs, Brain Age, Pokemon, Animal Crossings. The ones in blue were created for just this current generation. Sony has no phenomenoms so they cannot compare at all.
|
Sony has games that are innovative, this isn't an opinion either. Also, I said in SOME instances ( that means places in the world) the PlayStation is still the biggest brand, sorry you can't understand nor accept that. That wasn't even the basis of my argument. It's that yes, Nintendo does have high quality software/companies, but so does Sony. Doesn't matter which one of them sells more, in fact, it hasn't mattered the past two gens that Nintendo's 1st Party IPs wipe the floor with Sony's, the Playstation always had something for everyone which is one of the ways it became so successful in the first place.
Luckily, most of what you say is your opinion, and such behavior isn't reflected throughout the entire industry. Try not to see things from such a one-sided point of view and you might actually be a decent poster.
|
Innovation? I said effective innovation, not some nichified game. Effective innovation is a game which stands proud at the top of its genre. Copyers get 2nd best or worse in most cases and Sony aren't top of the game anywhere. Sony are at best Pepsi to the Coke which is Nintendo. The third parties to which you ascribe the 'Playstation diversity' aren't going to help Sony one bit. They will go where the money is and since Sony doesn't make games which stand out too far from the crowd you can replace one Sony game with pretty much any substitute third party game if you wanted with few exceptions.
Sony has nothing in comparison to Nintendo. Quality is a word has no actual meaning on its own. Its an undefined word which means quality is a meaningless concept for games. Sony would do a hell of a lot better if the dropped their goal of making everything a graphical masterpiece and tried some real gameplay for a change. Noone bats an eyelid that the Master Chief fights alone except when in Coop and yet they neglect this important feature. Millions played through Gears of War in Coop from beginning to end. Noone outside of a select few believe that pretty = fun for games.
Edit: Funny coincidence! My copy of Heavy Rain just arrived as I clicked 'post'. Sorry im out as I have a game to play. 
|
Your first parragraph is like you need a game to sell trillions and appeal to many people to be considered innovative, making games that are actually good but niche and dont appeal to large groups of people seem bad.
Oh, and the way you talk about quality being nothing but an undefined word is the same way you could talk about gameplay being good or bad, it seems to me that people have the stupid idea in their minds that a good looking game is the same as a game with no gameplay.
There is a lot of fail there, it gives me the idea you need a game to sell millions to be considered good, I hope you dont think the same about movies where you would think transformers 2 is a great movie or in music which would mean you consider the jonas brothers good. Actually, quality of a game can be known because it excells in what its meant to do, if its a shooter that doesnt make shooting good, its bad quality, if its a fighter thats unbalanced its bad quality, if its an online game with crappy online its bad quality.
So Id tell you to apreciate people can find good games on sony consoles even if these dont sell as much as the nintendo first party games, and stop the fanboy debates to make others people choice of consoles look bad when its clear both nintendo and sony console owners can get great things from their companies of choice.
Oh, and to many people here, before you post try to think a bit, if you think before you post you can actually avoid stupid comments and insulting others. To the thread, its clear the ps3 isnt the answer that would cover all of the wii and 360 fans tastes even with move because it lacks the software that made them choose their consoles, that, added to the fact that the ps3 costs money, makes them avoid getting one.
