Dude, how about you respect other people's views? Seriously, your opinion is no more valuable than Spartan's or mine or anybody elses for that matter. I myself don't agree that Sony has the best first party titles, but it's his opinion, and I have mine.

But I will give you this: The last sentence in his comment was indeed an ignorant thing to say.

As much as I want to say Sony, they have given great competition to nintendo to produce better games.

So...just because Sony lacks a platforming Mascot they are the devil...?

Just to play Devil's advocate, I would argue Mario and Pokemon alone top the amount of releases that Halo and GoW have,

Apple if it can be counted because they are taking away the gaming market and major publishers are cashing in on the success of Apple by releasing mostly shovelware rubbish for an inflated price

If not I'd have to say Microsoft due to overpriced peripharals, dodgy HW at the beginning of the generatuon, and a lack of variety in the game line-up exclusive-wise. If it's not a shooter it's not exclusive to the 360.

"They are so different in style from Nitnendo and Sega that they shouldn't be considered a rival."

That was my original point that I was trying to explain.

I can't really imagine Sony being seen as a rival to Nintendo. That would mean that they would have to be like what Flintheart Glomgold was to uncle scrooge, or what Dark Link is to Link. Sega was like a 'dark' Nitnendo, Sony isn't. They're a competitor, nothing more.

Since OP said don't hold back, and I have already posted so much of my opinion I might as well reveal that I consider them to be the common enemy that Nintendo and Sega should have seen coming. I hate the fact that their arrival ruined the awesome pepsi-coke rivalry that Nintendo and Sega had. The 16-bit era was perfect, there was noo need for anything to change. Since they came, console gaming changed, focus was placed on mature themes, and in game stories, and the console libraries changed into looking just like PC libraries. When I was a kid and looked at the PS1 library in stores, all I saw was computer games that didn't work on a computer. I hate all of those changes.

That is my uneducated, biased opinion, but that was not the point I was trying to make, all of the long discussion posts earlier originate from me trying to explain why I don't consider Sony to be Nintendo's rival.

Im not talking about opinion, Im just talking about from a sales perspective, which VGC has always been about - sales stats. That is, of course, unless with version 3.0 of VGC, its officially turned into another Gamespot. Please let me know if it has, I'll stop coming here. =)

Yeah, I can agree to that, my point was that you can't call one party out for rehashing the same game and not the others. C'mon, Son'ys most anticipated release for 2010 is the 5th iteration of a racing game.

I think the entire industry is guilty of milking existing franchises, but can you blame them? It is pretty hard to make a successful IP, so when you DO, you'll want to use that to increase your company's profit. It is, afterall, a business. =)

Oh God, that pisses me off so much! It pains me that my top 3 games of all time are all sequels. and to make matters worse, 2 of them are from the most milked franchise of all time (Final Fantasy) I really like original games but I admit it makes sense to release more sequels.

@kungkras  you must not play alot of HD console games.  there is nothing even remotely innovative about NSMBWii the fact is I can find about five games on an HD console that plays just like NSMBWii, theres Braid, splosion man, Limbo, Rocket Knight, LBP.  not to mention there much cheaper, all Ninty did was add in multiplayer, Sonic did that on Genesis years ago.