By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Just as I thought: Not Just Uncharted( which was oringinally fantasy game) but ALL SONY studios Sold out to XBOX styled games!

M.U.G.E.N on 28 September 2011

am i the only one who thinks or sees Uncharted as a game WITH fantasy elements? 0_o some parts of the game looks like it to me tbh..am i sensing that we are stuck in a 'certain' definition of fantasy here? the game doesn't need to have a dragon to make it fantasy or anything >_>



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

Around the Network
Moren on 28 September 2011
M.U.G.E.N said:
am i the only one who thinks or sees Uncharted as a game WITH fantasy elements? 0_o some parts of the game looks like it to me tbh..am i sensing that we are stuck in a 'certain' definition of fantasy here? the game doesn't need to have a dragon to make it fantasy or anything >_>

Well, techinically, every game, from GTA to CoD, has fantasy elements, but "this" fantasy is more about stuff that would never ever happen (Dragons FTW!) more than the actual definition.



AbbathTheGrim on 28 September 2011
padib said:
AbbathTheGrim said:
padib said:
AbbathTheGrim said:
padib said:
AbbathTheGrim said:
padib said:
AbbathTheGrim said:

*trimmed*

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.

*trimmed*


@bolded. I agree that SCE Japan (especially Team Ico) is an excellent studio, but don't go as far as saying Nintendo and MS don't push high quality content you just sound incredibly biased. Yes, they create content that is out of this world, but so does Microsoft, so does Nintendo. Halo may be a shooter, but it has a very deep story attached to it.

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.

Okay, the story criticism is fair against Nintendo, though there are exceptions. I'll just name Link to the Past, Metroid Prime (think Chozo lore), Super Metroid.

Now if you tell me Super Metroid doesn't have a good story, man it's all about the atmosphere. Shadow of the Colossus is very similar to Super Metroid in that respect. And SotC's story, though amazing, is very, very short. And Super Mario Bros, when it came out, had one of the best storylines of the day, though we laugh at it today.

But I can't accept it against Microsoft. Halo, though I'll be truthful I haven't played it extensively, I have seen clips and just know that it has a very deep storyline. And Fable again I've only played parts of it, but someone correct me if I'm wrong in saying this is a story-heavy game. Sadly I can't say Alan Wake, because it wasn't made by MS.

I see what you're saying, but again you're being biased.

 

 

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.

 

 

 

You need to remember, to every opinion its weight.

A quality opinion is one that considers multiple factors in its development. When one side is considered more than another for the sake of elevating it, then the opinion becomes biased. When one side is considered more than another due to lack of knowledge, it's lack of knowledge.

I don't want to name you anything anymore, so from now on I'll just keep it general, I just think you weren't taking everything into account when formulating your thought.

Peace

You say you don't want to name me anything more? That means you consider you can name me something more. If you cannot push forward and spill what you are thinking then please don't try to taunt me.

With your explanation bias, are you saying that that is my case? If that is so, tell me, in which part of what I have discussed about this topic of Xbox being an influence to all Sony studios my preference for Sony has clouded my judgement and has made me left out facts in favor of my preference?

There is bias eveywhere because of our subjectivity, but that doesn't mean I cannot separate facts from opinions. If you think that I have diluded these two in my comments, point out where I have done such thing.

Okay then, given your polite request I'll answer, and politely so. Well, to start your opinion on Nintendo's ability to create deep storylines and characters is limited. To be explicit, you named 1 game which is obviously shallow when it comes to that area of a game: Mario. I can only agree with you that Mario, as a game, has little value when it comes to depth of characters and story. I can only agree. But the fact that it is the only example you bring to light leads me to consider your opinion incomplete, or not interesting to me, especially as a Nintendo fan.

As in my reply, I provided a share of nintendo games that provided depth to the experience, I cited the Zelda and Metroid series, and there are more. There are games like endless ocean, Pandora's Tower (which I can only guess has a compelling sense of atmosphere), Trace Memory, and there are probably others that escape my knowledge. To be honest, I don't completely know myself, I also work on a level of guessing. I've never played Endless Ocean, I've never played Pandora's Tower, neither have I even played Trace Memory. But what I work on are educated guesses. Granted, I don't have time to play all the games, but at the very least I try to stay informed on those games which I don't have the time to play. Having said that, I know Nintendo has the ability to provide depth to games, but given its business plan, it is not operating on it on its majority of games, Mario being a staple of that fact. However, when judging the company, you need to take all its games into account, and that gives your opinion more value.

I know now you were being honest, but at least try to put the effort in especially when passing blanket statements. Then again, everyone is entitled to their opinions, but I can't be expected to respect one that is based on constricted analysis.

I am a polite person as long as no one is trying to shove Christianity up my behind.

Now, taking your definition of bias: "A quality opinion is one that considers multiple factors in its development... When one side is considered more than another due to lack of knowledge, it's lack of knowledge." Not really bias in here, but, did you actually take into account the "factor", the possibility that you do not know what games I have played from Nintendo and what games I have not? Did you have the enough "knowledge" to encase my opinion as biased? I got into gaming with Nintendo, NES, then went with the Genesis and then got into Sony. I am not a kid who just grabbed a PS3 from the store shelf.

What I said was, you give me a game that has great gameplay and story and it can garner my respect. I did not say anything else. Right now there are pretty thin chances I can get that from Nintendo.

I don't get what you mean with blanket statements, especially when you say I have made one or more. Which blank statement(s) have I done?



Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1

M.U.G.E.N on 28 September 2011
morenoingrato said:
M.U.G.E.N said:
am i the only one who thinks or sees Uncharted as a game WITH fantasy elements? 0_o some parts of the game looks like it to me tbh..am i sensing that we are stuck in a 'certain' definition of fantasy here? the game doesn't need to have a dragon to make it fantasy or anything >_>

Well, techinically, every game, from GTA to CoD, has fantasy elements, but "this" fantasy is more about stuff that would never ever happen (Dragons FTW!) more than the actual definition.


yes i understand that and that's exactly what I'm referring to as well...have you played Uncharted 1 and 2? both have such fantasy elements in them. and I'm not talking about his unrealistic luck either. As Padib mentioned, think of early Indiana Jones movies.

@padib: agreed..and I don't understand french but that movie looks like quite the trip 0_o



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

zarx on 28 September 2011
AbbathTheGrim said:
zarx said:
AbbathTheGrim said:

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.

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".

You mean Warhawk? The rework of the 1995 game and that was already in development in 2005?

I don't know what you are trying to do by excluding Studios. The problem here is that it was generalized that all of Sony's first party studios ended up doing gritty shooters which wasn't the case.

Even if Naughty Dog says that Sony pushed to make games more realistic and that was the case in that time, what happened? Why Insomniac and Naughty Dog were the only ones that turned from Jak and Ratchet to shooters? In the end all the other Studios did not followed the trend and released games that make Sony the most diverse first party developers or all gaming today. What do I want to say with this? What we have right now from Sony's first parties are games that weren't influenced by what was selling as hot cakes in the box.

Wait, are you saying that Killzone a PS2 game was influenced by the successful Xbox360 games? I ask because that is what we are talking about here. If you want to discuss the supposed influence of Halo in Killzone that is another discussion that has nothing to do with this, but even there, apart from being a Sci-fi FPS, there is nothing else there.

And why do you think they picked that game to rework? And 2005 was when the directive was probably given. As for excluding certain studios I thought I made that clear, what part don't you understand, as Japan is a seperate entity with different management so common sense would dictate that Naughty Dog wouldn't be including them in the statement.

not just shooters neccessaraly if you read the quote it only refers to visual styling, the fact that the majority of western Sony developed IPs this gen do match that brief, and that covers all the Studios working on AAA retail releases (note that I am using the industry meaning of the term, A grade budget, A grade telent and A grade advertising not review score) in the west. The only franchises that survived from last generation were ether very successful or also matched the brief. Also who is talking about right now? It's clear we are talking about games that were in development from 2005-7.

Obviusly the directive was given at the start of the generation later in the generation Sony switched stratergy but that doesn't make the statement untrue. And there were other studios that conhtinued franchises that already met the brief like killzone, God of War (fantasy elements but gritty violent and 'realistically' modeled main char) and also suxker punch. Also I don't get why you think that a Naughty dog dev would lie about this he said all studios were directed to make games closer to a style that was popular on Xbox (notice I don't say 360) Killzone was positioned as a 'Halo killer' what more do you want?

Also i don't get why you think a 'big push' would = all games changing it's not all or nothing



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

Around the Network
makingmusic476 on 28 September 2011
zarx said:

And why do you think they picked that game to rework? And 2005 was when the directive was probably given. As for excluding certain studios I thought I made that clear, what part don't you understand, as Japan is a seperate entity with different management so common sense would dictate that Naughty Dog wouldn't be including them in the statement.

not just shooters neccessaraly if you read the quote it only refers to visual styling, the fact that the majority of western Sony developed IPs this gen do match that brief, and that covers all the Studios working on AAA retail releases (note that I am using the industry meaning of the term, A grade budget, A grade telent and A grade advertising not review score) in the west. The only franchises that survived from last generation were ether very successful or also matched the brief. Also who is talking about right now? It's clear we are talking about games that were in development from 2005-7.

Obviusly the directive was given at the start of the generation later in the generation Sony switched stratergy but that doesn't make the statement untrue. And there were other studios that conhtinued franchises that already met the brief like killzone, God of War (fantasy elements but gritty violent and 'realistically' modeled main char) and also suxker punch. Also I don't get why you think that a Naughty dog dev would lie about this he said all studios were directed to make games closer to a style that was popular on Xbox (notice I don't say 360) Killzone was positioned as a 'Halo killer' what more do you want?

Also i don't get why you think a 'big push' would = all games changing it's not all or nothing


He was clearly addressing the topic creator with that, given the thread title claims "ALL SONY studios sold out".



VGKing on 28 September 2011

The success of the Xbox gritty shooters? Call me crazy but isn't the only successful Xbox game Halo? What's so gritty about it? In fact it's a fantasy game.....



kurasakiichimaru on 29 September 2011

I would like an Uncharted Spinoff with fantasy elements like that. They could do it with Vita as a test to see if anyone would bite it and if it works then they can port it to the PS3. Don't you think that'll be a great idea. Nathan as a knight/adventurer...Who doesn't want that?



outlawauron on 29 September 2011
AbbathTheGrim said:
Xxain said:
I knew everyone SONY's 1st IP's just felt like xbox games. shit Gears didnt just influenced..but completely changed the way 1st parties made there games.


Yeah, that is why God of War, Motorstorm, LittleBigPlanet, Grand Turismo, Fat Princess, Last Guardian, ModNation Racers, etc. are all shooters and Killzone started with the second installment.

Let's not even bring in things that were published by Sony like Lair and Heavenly Sword. Gears copy if I ever saw one.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

hikaruchan on 29 September 2011
Mirson said:

Thank you Xbox for making Uncharted better than it would have been.

Western games > eastern games.

Not soure if seirus 



Japanese Pop Culture Otaku