You say "ALL SONY studios Sold out to XBOX styled games". Japan Studio is amongst the highest level of gaming development within Sony and gaming as a whole. Sony is backing The Last Guardian up, you can see the game in the Kevin Butler ads, and this game is nothing like any of the games that Microsoft and even Nintendo are backing up and trying to shove to their followers.

Santa Monica is another Sony studio. You say "ALL SONY studios Sold out ot XBOX styled games" now tell me what did Santa Monica do to make a game in the vein of what is popular in the little box?

Did Sony cancel LBP because the little box did not have a successful platformer game and LBP could be too much of a risk? No, they backed that game up.

Yeah, and Halo was the first Sci-fi FPS shooter around, right? While Halo was a rainbow fest, Killzone was the gritty shooter that eventually led, after Killzone 2, to make the Halo Reach developers to look at Killzone to make the game with a more realistic experience. They said that themselves.

You say the "play.create.share." directive, where did Sony copied this from the little box? You say it with a negative connotation: "peared back" you say? As retreating from it? Those games released and had their promotion, what do you want from Sony, you want them to keep promoting the games even now. It is the natural way that promotion of a game goes, it releases and then the company focuses on the next thing. You don't know what Sony is or isn't doing right now about those titles, neither do I, but at least I know that Sony, in contrast to the little box, tell their first parties and second parties to do something.

Sony may had told Naughty Dog and Insomniac (don't know details about this one) to make shooters because of the success of Halo and Gears of What, but these little box games are neither the first third person shooters and first person shooters around. It was more of an influence of what the consumers wanted and make offerings in those already stablished gaming genres in the form of UC and Resistance. A direct influence of a game would be what Reach had with Killzone since Killzone doesn't sell even half of what Halo does. That was an artistic direction in which Halo was influenced instead of how Sony only saw what genres where selling the most and did something in those already stablished genres.

The fact is simple, two studios between several studios does not equal "ALL" in spite of any arguing you can do. Change the title of the thread because that is nothing but nonesense.

If you have a problem with someone's ban, do exactly what you did-- let a head moderater know or report the post.  No need to derail a thread about it. If you think people have said worse things, please report them too!

Personally, it's an insulting post.  There's a special word for someone who thinks everything they like is better than someone elses and that kind of attitude doesn't need to be here.  So what if someone enjoys only shooters, only Call of Duty, or loves to buy Madden every year.  That doesn't make your taste in gaming better than theirs.  They know what they like and that's what matters, not that you think you're better than them and they're only simpletons.

If either of you or anyone else has anything else to say on the matter, please message me and the head mods and we can talk about it through messages, but please lets not derail the thread any more. 

Also, you only need to report it once. 

You got it wrong. I am talking about the little box and Nintendo releasing something similar in gameplay to The Last Guardian.

Nintendo and Microsoft have both solid games. When it comes to Nintendo, I enjoyed Mario, the good ol' side scrolling Mario, but a game that can't attach me with its story doesn't have the least chance of earning my respect and full devotion. Mario doesn't even have a story so I just enjoy playing it while it lasts, then nothing.

Videogames to me must go beyond gameplay, be it understood as having that great gameplay and more, specially when it comes to stories.

my guess is, that - eventually, many people will grow tired of teh gunz, which will lead to another genre beeing the king of the industry, just like RPGs were in the 90's, and like platformers were before them.

id say this'll be an everrepeating cycle, since everything is getting boring after enough time has passed.

@te:  .. well, its a shame that sony didnt let them do as they originally wanted, but on the other hand, Uncharted is just a brilliant game (just not my cup of tea), and it seems that its partly thanks to sony ?

Its funny. Infamous came out people said it was a crackdown rip-off. But now its an xbox gritty shooter rip-off.

People forget that when Sony pushes something, they only encourage it, for eg PS Move. They don't force it like kinect. Obviously people at Naughty Dog felt it would be great for Uncharted to have a more realistic look and we all know where that game stacks up artistically.

No need to feel angry. Littlebigplanet impressed Sony so they actually bought media molecule and honestly they could have "pushed" realism across that game as well. But they know better.

What about ratchet and clank? Why isn't it any more realistic? Why is Sony still making it?

And now we are getting a sly cooper game funded by sony but made by someone else, not sucker punch. That's because sucker punch have moved on? Either way, its hardly "Sony is only for realistic games".

There was an article where it was stated that Sony America asked Santa Monica to make God of War an fps.....is it an fps? NO.

Its called a choice.

I see nothing wrong with it.

I can't tell if this thread is serious or not........*confused face*

I don't know the reason why you are putting so much effort in calling me biased. Am I biased? Sure I am. I thought that subjetcivity was easily enough to be discerned as having to put an "Opinion" sign in every comment I make. But are you trying imply my subjetcivity with some negative connotation? Being that the case, then, as much biased as I am, so are you by calling such games's stories from Zelda, Prime, Halo, Fable, as good since that is nothing but a simple opinion.

Now first off yes the thread title is an exageration but it is also not entiirely untrue.

I have alredy explained why Japan was most likely exempt.

Sony Santa Monica codeveloped Warhawk 

looks pretty ‘realistic’ games in terms of how it was modeled and rendered to me.

Little big planet was not in development under Sony when the directive was given out at the start of the generation, how is that hard for you to understand?

Killzone is Halo crossed hith medal of honor yes ince again copying a game that was sucessful on Xbox and one that was gritty and ‘realistic’ games in terms of how it was modeled and rendered.

that directive came much later and was spearhedded by ex MS guys, well ex lionhead to be exact, you could ague Sony was trying to steal the idea away from MS.

Yes it was influinced by what people wanted, that was being provided by MS more than Sony so Sony pushed to have more games of that type, simple as that. And all AAA SCE worldwide studios (excluding Japan as they are independantly run) from the start of the generation were instructed to make ‘realistic’ games in terms of how it was modeled and rendered games. And the fact is in the article from a quote from a Naughty Dog employee "not just at Naughty Dog but at all of Sony’s development companies at the time".