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

Forums - Sony - Sony: We Should Probably Develop Less Games

miz1q2w3e on 13 February 2012
pezus said:

nsomniac has got multiple awards for being one of the best places to work at, so I don't think they're mismanaged or in any trouble. 20 million profit is still a worth while one, not every single game needs to be a blockbuster. MS can't even do that. 

Who says it can't be a nice place to work and be mismanaged? In fact, it might seem like a nice place to work because managment might be lax.



Around the Network
happydolphin on 13 February 2012

MARCUSDJACKSON said:

 loss leading? explain plz.

unfortunately Sony doesn't have that AAA title and will likely continue to struggle to find their next big(LBP,GT5,UC) ip. 

Sony has great partners but not strong ones, so if Sony can lock in a strong indie dev. somewhere in the future, then i can see a big tripleA title coming from Sony.

junk? you must mean ip that don't sell, cause junk is far from an accurate word to use in describing the ip in question.  

loss leading, i.e. losing money for every platform sold. For playstation, it's playstation 3 and Vita sold at a loss for a prolongued period post launch.

Yes they do have that AAA title you're looking for, it's called Uncharted, and The Last of Us, The Last Guardian, InFamous, LBP, GoW. Gran Turismo is already a mega franchise! In other words, save those 20Million per weak game, and invest in marketing and pushing those for which you can leverage each another good 3Mil!

Indie dev? Are you kidding me? Fuck that. They need to strengthen ND, Media Molecule, Santa Monica and Insomniac, as well as Team Ico, and they need to push the big boys into massive success, via marketing and non-dilution of flagship software.

Sorry if I tingle your fannybone. I called them junk because it doesn't appeal to me, and it sure as hell doesn't seem to appeal to the public either, if we go by sales. Listen, MS owns the nitty gritty genre, Sony can't compete there. It's like butting your head to make a massive selling football game when Madden has been king for years. Unless you can topple the mountain king, stop trying! They rather need to differentiate themselves more than try to fend MS on their winning turf. KZ, Socom and Resistance need to stop if Sony is to stay in the game imho.



sales2099 on 13 February 2012
osamanobama said:
sales2099 said:
osamanobama said:
Jexy said:
osamanobama said:
sales2099 said:
Ha....ha. Id like to say I told you so.

Having a ton of exclusives every year with therefore thin spread marketing per game will lead to sales of each game not giving a proper return on investment. Without proper awareness, blockbusters will be rare and therefore will fade in the memories of the general gaming public within a year.

Thats why MS releases a few exclusives and markets the crap out of them, while releasing new games on lower-risk avenues like XBLA where it doesnt really matter if they flop or not.

and thats good for gamers, how?

why does it matter at all how well the games are selling, if they are good.

are you more statisfied as a gamer to now that, sure you only had 1 or 2 games this year, but at least the company that published them is making alot of money. i think most people just care if there are a lot of good games. (which is why i bought the ps3 because there are a lot of games, with a lot of quality, i didnt buy  a PS3 because i was hoping sony would make billions of dollars. and really unless you own stock in the company, why should you care.

how does that benefit the gamer? i think games benefit the gamer, dont you?

It benefits the gamer in that there will continue to be more games from them.  You won't get any new games from a company that no longer can afford to make them or ceases to exist at all.  However, there needs to be a happy medium.  Like I said in previous posts, they can't keep churning out crap like the most recent socom games.  They aren't good, get bad reviews, bad word of mouth, and don't sell, yet cost lots of money.  Microsoft however, needs more exclusives than just Halo, Gears, Forza, and Fable. 

Remember, it isn't just the sales and the company that suffers, it's the quality of games, and Sony admitted that.  Production budgets and values get cut when you spread yourself too thin.  The consumer doesn't get as quality of a game.  I see it similar to how the government needs to cut back on spending by eliminating the crap.  That doesn't mean I want the government, or gaming companies, to not take risks on new technologies or new games.  It just means I don't want them spending money on unnecessary things.  Too many of Sony's games end up stuck in limbo for one reason or another, which just sucks away money from them with no return on it, and no game ever being made.  They need to either do it, or don't do it.  But they won't be around for much longer at this rate, thus they will be unable to supply us as consumers with awesome games. 

so 1 (2 if you count ALL 4 One) game out of... what 10. all the other games were of superb quality.

and it doesnt matter to the gamer, until the company ceases to make games. what happens in the mean time is of no concern, its up to the company to be profitable, and if it takes making less games, milking some more like other companies do to become profitable, thats still not good for the gamer.

games are good for the gamer. and Sony has been churning out tons of very high quality exclusives, with 1 or 2 duds. thats good for the gamer, if they reduce those games, its bad. sure i want Sony to do good, but if it comes at the expense of games, then i will be moving to which ever company provides me those games. i dont buy the system so the company makes profit, i buy the system for the games.

and the only game that i regret buying from Sony was Socom 4, and i bought that because of the move support ( and perhaps the little fanboy in me), all the other games i bought from Sony either met my expectations or vastly exceeded them.

So really in no way is it good for the gamer, for a company to do what Microsoft does.

if i worked for Microsoft or had their stock, i would love it, but i dont. if i worked for Sony or owned their stock, i would be pisses, but i dont. i own their game system, i own it to play games, not to profit Sony.

"thats still not good for the gamer" "games are good for the gamer"......Please stop sounding like an idealist. Start being a realist. 

This is a business and the satisfaction of you, the gamer, ultimately depends on the sustainability of the company that provides them. Most Sony exclusives undersell to similar multiplats and expectations, not giving a proper return on investment. Do you care as a gamer? Offcourse not (which is kinda selfish). But with lower then expected sales comes the greater possibility that you won't see a sequel or the game gets more casual to get more sales. With greater marketing per exclusive, you will actually get a bigger following and the game mechanics won't be compromised to cater to the mass market when the sequel is announced. 

You, the "exclusive nut", which isnt an insult, are a minority. Outside the internet, most 360/PS3 gamers are really content with 3rd party offerings. It is the blockbuster exclusives that rise above the 3rd party ocean of games. An exclusive with low marketing is just another "meh" title to the masses, and I think Sony is starting to see that. 

So really, from your point of view "and it doesnt matter to the gamer, until the company ceases to make games", you want Sony to just crank out games no matter how much it puts them in the red. This is kinda like what is actually happening now given Sony financials. Really, it shows your part of the problem, asking them to give you games at a cost to the business, thus your part of the ones sucking them dry. 

i a game nut, doesnt matter if its exclusive or multiplat, i will buy it, if its good.

and i will say this, i may not speak for everyone, but i am for myself, and less games will never be good for me.

i bought my PlayStation because I wanted games, lots of them. i would have bought a different system if i cared for a few games that sold a lot. that doesnt bring me joy, knowing the 2 games i bought this year sold 10 million or whatever. what does bring me joy, is the 9 or so Games i bought this year

Good for you. Well if u actually pay attention here, Sony can't keep this pace up. High production exclusives with low sales isnt a sustainable business. 

Once again, your kind is part of the problem, expecting Sony to crank out the games until they are forced to close a studio or two. 

But hey....at least your happy :P



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

ZaneWane on 13 February 2012
pezus said:
happydolphin said:

MARCUSDJACKSON said:

 loss leading? explain plz.

unfortunately Sony doesn't have that AAA title and will likely continue to struggle to find their next big(LBP,GT5,UC) ip. 

Sony has great partners but not strong ones, so if Sony can lock in a strong indie dev. somewhere in the future, then i can see a big tripleA title coming from Sony.

junk? you must mean ip that don't sell, cause junk is far from an accurate word to use in describing the ip in question.  

loss leading, i.e. losing money for every platform sold. For playstation, it's playstation 3 and Vita sold at a loss for a prolongued period post launch.

Yes they do have that AAA title you're looking for, it's called Uncharted, and The Last of Us, The Last Guardian, InFamous, LBP, GoW. Gran Turismo is already a mega franchise! In other words, save those 20Million per weak game, and invest in marketing and pushing those for which you can leverage each another good 3Mil!

Indie dev? Are you kidding me? Fuck that. They need to strengthen ND, Media Molecule, Santa Monica and Insomniac, as well as Team Ico, and they need to push the big boys into massive success, via marketing and non-dilution of flagship software.

Sorry if I tingle your fannybone. I called them junk because it doesn't appeal to me, and it sure as hell doesn't seem to appeal to the public either, if we go by sales. Listen, MS owns the nitty gritty genre, Sony can't compete there. It's like butting your head to make a massive selling football game when Madden has been king for years. Unless you can topple the mountain king, stop trying! They rather need to differentiate themselves more than try to fend MS on their winning turf. KZ, Socom and Resistance need to stop if Sony is to stay in the game imho.

What has MS done in the "nitty gritty" genre? Gears is the only one that fits the bill and it doesn't sell a whole lot more than Uncharted. And according to you they should drop Team Ico, despite their games' insane quality. They should also drop R&C, Resistance, Motorstorm, Socom, KZ. They'll end up like MS if they do that and will have to resort to casual games.

uncharted is more heavy bundled compred to gears



happydolphin on 13 February 2012
pezus said:

What has MS done in the "nitty gritty" genre? Gears is the only one that fits the bill and it doesn't sell a whole lot more than Uncharted. And according to you they should drop Team Ico, despite their games' insane quality. They should also drop R&C, Resistance, Motorstorm, Socom, KZ. They'll end up like MS if they do that and will have to resort to casual games.

Euff. Uncharted is one of the best new series for Sony. If Gears sells as much as UC, that's good. One thing is certain it sells boatloads more than Resistance.

Maybe they should drop R&C, Resistance, Motorstorm, Socom and KZ. They need to expand UC, LBP, inFamous, LoU-ish games, Team Ico games. They need to be different. That's what Nintendo did in 2000, and they won. They called it "The Nintendo Difference". Sony will not win in the Nitty Gritty genre. They will neither win with dying franchises such as R&C. That's outdated stuff.

MS has GoW, that's already enough. I'm sure there are more, but they are not coming to me. CoD is another shooter that takes up tons of audience attention, it's a saturated market, and a battle of attrition for Sony, it's not lucrative.



Around the Network
happydolphin on 13 February 2012
pezus said:
happydolphin said:
pezus said:

What has MS done in the "nitty gritty" genre? Gears is the only one that fits the bill and it doesn't sell a whole lot more than Uncharted. And according to you they should drop Team Ico, despite their games' insane quality. They should also drop R&C, Resistance, Motorstorm, Socom, KZ. They'll end up like MS if they do that and will have to resort to casual games.

Euff. Uncharted is one of the best new series for Sony. If Gears sells as much as UC, that's good. One thing is certain it sells boatloads more than Resistance.

Maybe they should drop R&C, Resistance, Motorstorm, Socom and KZ. They need to expand UC, LBP, inFamous, LoU-ish games, Team Ico games. They need to be different. That's what Nintendo did in 2000, and they won. They called it "The Nintendo Difference". Sony will not win in the Nitty Gritty genre. They will neither win with dying franchises such as R&C. That's outdated stuff.

MS has GoW, that's already enough. I'm sure there are more, but they are not coming to me. CoD is another shooter that takes up tons of audience attention, it's a saturated market, and a battle of attrition for Sony, it's not lucrative.

Actually, there are no more. 

Left 4 Dead?



happydolphin on 13 February 2012
pezus said:
happydolphin said:
pezus said:

Actually, there are no more. 

Left 4 Dead?

Nope, not an exclusive so it doesn't count for this discussion.

Sorry bud, last time I checked, that didn't matter, as this shows you. Sony simply cannot compete on this front. It's again a war of attrition. They need greener pastures, bluer oceans.

PosGamePlatformYearGenrePublisherNorth AmericaEuropeJapanRest of WorldGlobal
1 Left 4 Dead 2 X360 2009 Shooter Electronic Arts 2.33 0.71 0.05 0.33 3.42
2 Left 4 Dead X360 2008 Shooter Electronic Arts 2.28 0.43 0.05 0.27 3.03
3 Left 4 Dead 2 PC 2009 Shooter Valve 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.03 0.30
4 The Fairly Odd Parents: Enter the Cleft GBA 2002 Platform THQ 0.14 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.20
5 Left Brain Right Brain: Use Both Hands Train Both Sides DS 2007 Misc 505 Games 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.16
6 Left Brain Right Brain 2 DS 2008 Misc Majesco 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.11
7 Left 4 Dead PC 2008 Shooter Electronic Arts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00


happydolphin on 13 February 2012
pezus said:

I thought you were saying MS owns the nitty and gritty genre and therefore Sony shouldn't try? L4D has nothing to do with MS

Whether it's in-house or contracted, the genre is owned (by this I mean pwnd, not literally owned) by the XBOX brand.



happydolphin on 13 February 2012
pezus said:

Why don't Sony cancel all platformers then too, since Mario owns them all? Everyone should cancel their FPS too because they don't sell as well as cod.

Now you're talking. Sony needs to focus on its new bread and butter. Hollywood type games (UC, LoU0), games that appeal more to kids (LBP, Modnation Racers), new concept games (inFamous, GoW). They need to get out of the attrition and make a place and a name for themselves. Once that's done, then can they tackle MS if they can offer something alternative or better. For now, it's not working.

Listen bud, I may be a Nintendo die-hard fan, but I'm not a Sony hater. So long as they're in, I will argue what they are to do in order to succeed. We're also here to discuss business, I won't suggest courses of action that would lead Sony to their doom. Rather oddly, it's the Sony fans that are advocating that :S



happydolphin on 13 February 2012
pezus said:
happydolphin said:
pezus said:

Why don't Sony cancel all platformers then too, since Mario owns them all? Everyone should cancel their FPS too because they don't sell as well as cod.

Now you're talking. Sony needs to focus on its new bread and butter. Hollywood type games (UC, LoU0), games that appeal more to kids (LBP, Modnation Racers), new concept games (inFamous, GoW). They need to get out of the attrition and make a place and a name for themselves. Once that's done, then can they tackle MS if they can offer something alternative or better. For now, it's not working.

Listen bud, I may be a Nintendo die-hard fan, but I'm not a Sony hater. So long as they're in, I will argue what they are to do in order to succeed. We're also here to discuss business, I won't suggest courses of action that would lead Sony to their doom. Rather oddly, it's the Sony fans that are advocating that :S

No, it's you that thinks the Resistance games and R&C are leading them to their doom while it's already been said they most likely make a profit on them. What they want to do is stop making bad games, like Socom 4 and R&C:A4O and start making better games in the same franchises. A4O isn't a proper R&C, hence the decline. Socom 4 was just mediocre, hence bad sales. Resistance 3 sold quite well and won't end far from R2. Modnation Racers is not a big seller, so I don't know why you think they should focus on that but drop their bigger sellers.

The production costs of MNR are obviously smaller for the sales produced (1M). They definitely should continue with that. Plus, it has much untapped potential (can't say the same about Resistance or R&C tho...).

What you don't get, my dear pezus, is that it isn't a question of making profit here. It's a question of making lots or less profit (of course I revised this after my discussion with you and osamaobama).  In other words, if they can spend to leverage sales of the more promising games, then that would be the smart way to go, business-wise. All this because the PS3 caused heavy losses due to loss-leading.

How do you not see it?