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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Does sony have a franchise that will sell the PS4 out of the gate

JayWood2010 said:
forevercloud3000 said:
JimmyDanger said:

It's proof of nothing, except that even with an extra year in development over MS, they still couldn't sell more units in that First 5 years - even now in this sixth year.

If the PS3 released a year earlier - would they have had the library? Would it have been even MORE expensive? Less powerful?

If the 360 released a year later would it have been more powerful? With a larger library? Cheaper?

And how would either of these variable factors have affected sales for each platform? Would every single one of those 6 million people bought a PS3 instead, and never bought an xbox (giving Sony a 4.5 million unit lead) - have 75% of those 6 million bought a PS3 already either as a companion console or straight up replacement? It's all just complete speculation. If you think the ONLY reason PS2 outsold GC/XBX was because of it's earlier release - which really , was probably the most minor factor when weighed against full software/controller BC (probably the main reason I bought a PS2 initially, as the launch lineup wasn't so hot) , DVD playback (without additional addon), first/3rd party exclusive library  - then - well I know nobody believes that the primaray reason the PS2 dominated was because it was out first. The same way no one attributes the NES's success due to the fact it was out first, or the Gameboys (vs Lynx/Gamegear) - or any other historical sales comparison.

No - there is no proof of anything in "what if"/"elselworlds" speculation. The only variables we can account for in reality are those based in our reality. Not Counter Earth/Earth 2 where the PS3 released in 2005 for $300 or the 360 released in 2006 for $500. That is pure fanboy fantasy.

Complete thread derailment - initially just replying to the point you made.

 

On topic - Yes they do. Gran Turismo. Though if they brought out Last Guardian at PS4 launch - they'd absolutely win a lot of hardcores over straight away - and also give Team ICO their best selling title ever. Can we call Team ICO a franchise? Technically not - but they are a brand that carries a lot of weight.

Though if they brought out a TRUE Parappa/Lammy sequel (the threadbare Parappa 2 doesn't count for me!) with multiple co-op/competitive modes, replayability with different versions of songs (the same way that when you finished Lammy, you could do the songs as PaRappa or Dark Lammy either solo or in co op/competitive - with different mixes of the track for each -  rather than do the same song while wearing a different colored beanie) - I would pay whatever it cost and preorder it now!

 

 


PS3 is selling at a faster pace than 360 with...

 

  1. Higher Price point
  2. Late Start
  3. Smaller Library of Games(at least at the start)
  4. Far harsher Critical Analysis
In this alternate reality speak, if PS3 came out first they would of had to have a decent library of games, started development earlier, etc. Otherwise they wouldn't release early.....which is the hypothetical we are talking about. What could MS have done any better if they had an extra year? Possibly make a more durable product less prone to failure at the beginning, yet that didn't really seem to impede sales in the first place. Maybe they would of had more games in development....but wait....they already had more games than PS3 in the beginning, so that still doesn't matter.
The idea is that if the two consoles switch released dates yet everything else about them remained the same, PS3 would have a 8-9million lead on 360 right now.I still think PS3 will eventually outsell it by generation's end. We saw this last gen when Xbox eventually outsold Gamecube in it's final years. This is just proof of selling power, PS3 has far better selling power with the most distinct barriers impeding it.
I do not think the head start is the only reason certain console's won their generation, but lets not kid ourselves, it damn sure helps. 

 


I didnt read your whole comment but yes you are correct, PS3 is ot pacing the X360 in hardware. Software no, but hardware yes.

PS3 hardware sales went up so fast ever since the PS3 exploit "USB dongle." You ONLY CAN/WILL get banned from PSN but you can still bypass and play the single player games. So what most users do is buy 2 PS3's. One for backups and the other for legit play eg. COD, Resident Evil (online play) MAJORITY will go legit on COD especially online due to its magic attraction.

Even if the PSP did not have "many games,"  the hardware sales is still impressive because of homebrew and emulators.



Around the Network
KeptoKnight said:
JayWood2010 said:
forevercloud3000 said:
JimmyDanger said:

It's proof of nothing, except that even with an extra year in development over MS, they still couldn't sell more units in that First 5 years - even now in this sixth year.

If the PS3 released a year earlier - would they have had the library? Would it have been even MORE expensive? Less powerful?

If the 360 released a year later would it have been more powerful? With a larger library? Cheaper?

And how would either of these variable factors have affected sales for each platform? Would every single one of those 6 million people bought a PS3 instead, and never bought an xbox (giving Sony a 4.5 million unit lead) - have 75% of those 6 million bought a PS3 already either as a companion console or straight up replacement? It's all just complete speculation. If you think the ONLY reason PS2 outsold GC/XBX was because of it's earlier release - which really , was probably the most minor factor when weighed against full software/controller BC (probably the main reason I bought a PS2 initially, as the launch lineup wasn't so hot) , DVD playback (without additional addon), first/3rd party exclusive library  - then - well I know nobody believes that the primaray reason the PS2 dominated was because it was out first. The same way no one attributes the NES's success due to the fact it was out first, or the Gameboys (vs Lynx/Gamegear) - or any other historical sales comparison.

No - there is no proof of anything in "what if"/"elselworlds" speculation. The only variables we can account for in reality are those based in our reality. Not Counter Earth/Earth 2 where the PS3 released in 2005 for $300 or the 360 released in 2006 for $500. That is pure fanboy fantasy.

Complete thread derailment - initially just replying to the point you made.

 

On topic - Yes they do. Gran Turismo. Though if they brought out Last Guardian at PS4 launch - they'd absolutely win a lot of hardcores over straight away - and also give Team ICO their best selling title ever. Can we call Team ICO a franchise? Technically not - but they are a brand that carries a lot of weight.

Though if they brought out a TRUE Parappa/Lammy sequel (the threadbare Parappa 2 doesn't count for me!) with multiple co-op/competitive modes, replayability with different versions of songs (the same way that when you finished Lammy, you could do the songs as PaRappa or Dark Lammy either solo or in co op/competitive - with different mixes of the track for each -  rather than do the same song while wearing a different colored beanie) - I would pay whatever it cost and preorder it now!

 

 


PS3 is selling at a faster pace than 360 with...

 

  1. Higher Price point
  2. Late Start
  3. Smaller Library of Games(at least at the start)
  4. Far harsher Critical Analysis
In this alternate reality speak, if PS3 came out first they would of had to have a decent library of games, started development earlier, etc. Otherwise they wouldn't release early.....which is the hypothetical we are talking about. What could MS have done any better if they had an extra year? Possibly make a more durable product less prone to failure at the beginning, yet that didn't really seem to impede sales in the first place. Maybe they would of had more games in development....but wait....they already had more games than PS3 in the beginning, so that still doesn't matter.
The idea is that if the two consoles switch released dates yet everything else about them remained the same, PS3 would have a 8-9million lead on 360 right now.I still think PS3 will eventually outsell it by generation's end. We saw this last gen when Xbox eventually outsold Gamecube in it's final years. This is just proof of selling power, PS3 has far better selling power with the most distinct barriers impeding it.
I do not think the head start is the only reason certain console's won their generation, but lets not kid ourselves, it damn sure helps. 

 


I didnt read your whole comment but yes you are correct, PS3 is ot pacing the X360 in hardware. Software no, but hardware yes.

PS3 hardware sales went up so fast ever since the PS3 exploit "USB dongle." You ONLY CAN/WILL get banned from PSN but you can still bypass and play the single player games. So what most users do is buy 2 PS3's. One for backups and the other for legit play eg. COD, Resident Evil (online play) MAJORITY will go legit on COD especially online due to its magic attraction.

Even if the PSP did not have "many games,"  the hardware sales is still impressive because of homebrew and emulators.


I agree and disagree.  PSP did really early when it first came out.  After the lack luster games people lost faith in it. PSP really sold poorly for years.

PS3 on th other hand I think has sold well since the big price cut announced by Kevin Butler.




       

JayWood2010 said:
KeptoKnight said:
JayWood2010 said:
forevercloud3000 said:
JimmyDanger said:

It's proof of nothing, except that even with an extra year in development over MS, they still couldn't sell more units in that First 5 years - even now in this sixth year.

If the PS3 released a year earlier - would they have had the library? Would it have been even MORE expensive? Less powerful?

If the 360 released a year later would it have been more powerful? With a larger library? Cheaper?

And how would either of these variable factors have affected sales for each platform? Would every single one of those 6 million people bought a PS3 instead, and never bought an xbox (giving Sony a 4.5 million unit lead) - have 75% of those 6 million bought a PS3 already either as a companion console or straight up replacement? It's all just complete speculation. If you think the ONLY reason PS2 outsold GC/XBX was because of it's earlier release - which really , was probably the most minor factor when weighed against full software/controller BC (probably the main reason I bought a PS2 initially, as the launch lineup wasn't so hot) , DVD playback (without additional addon), first/3rd party exclusive library  - then - well I know nobody believes that the primaray reason the PS2 dominated was because it was out first. The same way no one attributes the NES's success due to the fact it was out first, or the Gameboys (vs Lynx/Gamegear) - or any other historical sales comparison.

No - there is no proof of anything in "what if"/"elselworlds" speculation. The only variables we can account for in reality are those based in our reality. Not Counter Earth/Earth 2 where the PS3 released in 2005 for $300 or the 360 released in 2006 for $500. That is pure fanboy fantasy.

Complete thread derailment - initially just replying to the point you made.

 

On topic - Yes they do. Gran Turismo. Though if they brought out Last Guardian at PS4 launch - they'd absolutely win a lot of hardcores over straight away - and also give Team ICO their best selling title ever. Can we call Team ICO a franchise? Technically not - but they are a brand that carries a lot of weight.

Though if they brought out a TRUE Parappa/Lammy sequel (the threadbare Parappa 2 doesn't count for me!) with multiple co-op/competitive modes, replayability with different versions of songs (the same way that when you finished Lammy, you could do the songs as PaRappa or Dark Lammy either solo or in co op/competitive - with different mixes of the track for each -  rather than do the same song while wearing a different colored beanie) - I would pay whatever it cost and preorder it now!

 

 


PS3 is selling at a faster pace than 360 with...

 

  1. Higher Price point
  2. Late Start
  3. Smaller Library of Games(at least at the start)
  4. Far harsher Critical Analysis
In this alternate reality speak, if PS3 came out first they would of had to have a decent library of games, started development earlier, etc. Otherwise they wouldn't release early.....which is the hypothetical we are talking about. What could MS have done any better if they had an extra year? Possibly make a more durable product less prone to failure at the beginning, yet that didn't really seem to impede sales in the first place. Maybe they would of had more games in development....but wait....they already had more games than PS3 in the beginning, so that still doesn't matter.
The idea is that if the two consoles switch released dates yet everything else about them remained the same, PS3 would have a 8-9million lead on 360 right now.I still think PS3 will eventually outsell it by generation's end. We saw this last gen when Xbox eventually outsold Gamecube in it's final years. This is just proof of selling power, PS3 has far better selling power with the most distinct barriers impeding it.
I do not think the head start is the only reason certain console's won their generation, but lets not kid ourselves, it damn sure helps. 

 


I didnt read your whole comment but yes you are correct, PS3 is ot pacing the X360 in hardware. Software no, but hardware yes.

PS3 hardware sales went up so fast ever since the PS3 exploit "USB dongle." You ONLY CAN/WILL get banned from PSN but you can still bypass and play the single player games. So what most users do is buy 2 PS3's. One for backups and the other for legit play eg. COD, Resident Evil (online play) MAJORITY will go legit on COD especially online due to its magic attraction.

Even if the PSP did not have "many games,"  the hardware sales is still impressive because of homebrew and emulators.


I agree and disagree.  PSP did really early when it first came out.  After the lack luster games people lost faith in it. PSP really sold poorly for years.

PS3 on th other hand I think has sold well since the big price cut announced by Kevin Butler.

yeah its an addition. The price cut and the ease of homebrew. Its eaiser to do than Xbox or Wii.



KeptoKnight said:
JayWood2010 said:
KeptoKnight said:
JayWood2010 said:
forevercloud3000 said:
JimmyDanger said:

It's proof of nothing, except that even with an extra year in development over MS, they still couldn't sell more units in that First 5 years - even now in this sixth year.

If the PS3 released a year earlier - would they have had the library? Would it have been even MORE expensive? Less powerful?

If the 360 released a year later would it have been more powerful? With a larger library? Cheaper?

And how would either of these variable factors have affected sales for each platform? Would every single one of those 6 million people bought a PS3 instead, and never bought an xbox (giving Sony a 4.5 million unit lead) - have 75% of those 6 million bought a PS3 already either as a companion console or straight up replacement? It's all just complete speculation. If you think the ONLY reason PS2 outsold GC/XBX was because of it's earlier release - which really , was probably the most minor factor when weighed against full software/controller BC (probably the main reason I bought a PS2 initially, as the launch lineup wasn't so hot) , DVD playback (without additional addon), first/3rd party exclusive library  - then - well I know nobody believes that the primaray reason the PS2 dominated was because it was out first. The same way no one attributes the NES's success due to the fact it was out first, or the Gameboys (vs Lynx/Gamegear) - or any other historical sales comparison.

No - there is no proof of anything in "what if"/"elselworlds" speculation. The only variables we can account for in reality are those based in our reality. Not Counter Earth/Earth 2 where the PS3 released in 2005 for $300 or the 360 released in 2006 for $500. That is pure fanboy fantasy.

Complete thread derailment - initially just replying to the point you made.

 

On topic - Yes they do. Gran Turismo. Though if they brought out Last Guardian at PS4 launch - they'd absolutely win a lot of hardcores over straight away - and also give Team ICO their best selling title ever. Can we call Team ICO a franchise? Technically not - but they are a brand that carries a lot of weight.

Though if they brought out a TRUE Parappa/Lammy sequel (the threadbare Parappa 2 doesn't count for me!) with multiple co-op/competitive modes, replayability with different versions of songs (the same way that when you finished Lammy, you could do the songs as PaRappa or Dark Lammy either solo or in co op/competitive - with different mixes of the track for each -  rather than do the same song while wearing a different colored beanie) - I would pay whatever it cost and preorder it now!

 

 


PS3 is selling at a faster pace than 360 with...

 

  1. Higher Price point
  2. Late Start
  3. Smaller Library of Games(at least at the start)
  4. Far harsher Critical Analysis
In this alternate reality speak, if PS3 came out first they would of had to have a decent library of games, started development earlier, etc. Otherwise they wouldn't release early.....which is the hypothetical we are talking about. What could MS have done any better if they had an extra year? Possibly make a more durable product less prone to failure at the beginning, yet that didn't really seem to impede sales in the first place. Maybe they would of had more games in development....but wait....they already had more games than PS3 in the beginning, so that still doesn't matter.
The idea is that if the two consoles switch released dates yet everything else about them remained the same, PS3 would have a 8-9million lead on 360 right now.I still think PS3 will eventually outsell it by generation's end. We saw this last gen when Xbox eventually outsold Gamecube in it's final years. This is just proof of selling power, PS3 has far better selling power with the most distinct barriers impeding it.
I do not think the head start is the only reason certain console's won their generation, but lets not kid ourselves, it damn sure helps. 

 


I didnt read your whole comment but yes you are correct, PS3 is ot pacing the X360 in hardware. Software no, but hardware yes.

PS3 hardware sales went up so fast ever since the PS3 exploit "USB dongle." You ONLY CAN/WILL get banned from PSN but you can still bypass and play the single player games. So what most users do is buy 2 PS3's. One for backups and the other for legit play eg. COD, Resident Evil (online play) MAJORITY will go legit on COD especially online due to its magic attraction.

Even if the PSP did not have "many games,"  the hardware sales is still impressive because of homebrew and emulators.


I agree and disagree.  PSP did really early when it first came out.  After the lack luster games people lost faith in it. PSP really sold poorly for years.

PS3 on th other hand I think has sold well since the big price cut announced by Kevin Butler.

yeah its an addition. The price cut and the ease of homebrew. Its eaiser to do than Xbox or Wii.


That is true and surprising at the same time.  It took years before the PS3 got jail broke but when it did it got hit hard.




       

JayWood2010 said:
KeptoKnight said:
JayWood2010 said:
KeptoKnight said:
JayWood2010 said:
forevercloud3000 said:
JimmyDanger said:

It's proof of nothing, except that even with an extra year in development over MS, they still couldn't sell more units in that First 5 years - even now in this sixth year.

If the PS3 released a year earlier - would they have had the library? Would it have been even MORE expensive? Less powerful?

If the 360 released a year later would it have been more powerful? With a larger library? Cheaper?

And how would either of these variable factors have affected sales for each platform? Would every single one of those 6 million people bought a PS3 instead, and never bought an xbox (giving Sony a 4.5 million unit lead) - have 75% of those 6 million bought a PS3 already either as a companion console or straight up replacement? It's all just complete speculation. If you think the ONLY reason PS2 outsold GC/XBX was because of it's earlier release - which really , was probably the most minor factor when weighed against full software/controller BC (probably the main reason I bought a PS2 initially, as the launch lineup wasn't so hot) , DVD playback (without additional addon), first/3rd party exclusive library  - then - well I know nobody believes that the primaray reason the PS2 dominated was because it was out first. The same way no one attributes the NES's success due to the fact it was out first, or the Gameboys (vs Lynx/Gamegear) - or any other historical sales comparison.

No - there is no proof of anything in "what if"/"elselworlds" speculation. The only variables we can account for in reality are those based in our reality. Not Counter Earth/Earth 2 where the PS3 released in 2005 for $300 or the 360 released in 2006 for $500. That is pure fanboy fantasy.

Complete thread derailment - initially just replying to the point you made.

 

On topic - Yes they do. Gran Turismo. Though if they brought out Last Guardian at PS4 launch - they'd absolutely win a lot of hardcores over straight away - and also give Team ICO their best selling title ever. Can we call Team ICO a franchise? Technically not - but they are a brand that carries a lot of weight.

Though if they brought out a TRUE Parappa/Lammy sequel (the threadbare Parappa 2 doesn't count for me!) with multiple co-op/competitive modes, replayability with different versions of songs (the same way that when you finished Lammy, you could do the songs as PaRappa or Dark Lammy either solo or in co op/competitive - with different mixes of the track for each -  rather than do the same song while wearing a different colored beanie) - I would pay whatever it cost and preorder it now!

 

 


PS3 is selling at a faster pace than 360 with...

 

  1. Higher Price point
  2. Late Start
  3. Smaller Library of Games(at least at the start)
  4. Far harsher Critical Analysis
In this alternate reality speak, if PS3 came out first they would of had to have a decent library of games, started development earlier, etc. Otherwise they wouldn't release early.....which is the hypothetical we are talking about. What could MS have done any better if they had an extra year? Possibly make a more durable product less prone to failure at the beginning, yet that didn't really seem to impede sales in the first place. Maybe they would of had more games in development....but wait....they already had more games than PS3 in the beginning, so that still doesn't matter.
The idea is that if the two consoles switch released dates yet everything else about them remained the same, PS3 would have a 8-9million lead on 360 right now.I still think PS3 will eventually outsell it by generation's end. We saw this last gen when Xbox eventually outsold Gamecube in it's final years. This is just proof of selling power, PS3 has far better selling power with the most distinct barriers impeding it.
I do not think the head start is the only reason certain console's won their generation, but lets not kid ourselves, it damn sure helps. 

 


I didnt read your whole comment but yes you are correct, PS3 is ot pacing the X360 in hardware. Software no, but hardware yes.

PS3 hardware sales went up so fast ever since the PS3 exploit "USB dongle." You ONLY CAN/WILL get banned from PSN but you can still bypass and play the single player games. So what most users do is buy 2 PS3's. One for backups and the other for legit play eg. COD, Resident Evil (online play) MAJORITY will go legit on COD especially online due to its magic attraction.

Even if the PSP did not have "many games,"  the hardware sales is still impressive because of homebrew and emulators.


I agree and disagree.  PSP did really early when it first came out.  After the lack luster games people lost faith in it. PSP really sold poorly for years.

PS3 on th other hand I think has sold well since the big price cut announced by Kevin Butler.

yeah its an addition. The price cut and the ease of homebrew. Its eaiser to do than Xbox or Wii.


That is true and surprising at the same time.  It took years before the PS3 got jail broke but when it did it got hit hard.

yeah.



Around the Network

I really don't think PS3 game sales are impeded in any significant way due to piracy. It is in no way the PSP.

PSP hacking was so unbelievably easy, I actually made a killing at school helping people mod their PSP's for a small fee ;). Basically, everyone I knew wanted a PSP simply for that reason. It is the sad reality that the PSP only started to truely explode in the US when custom firmware became common place. It was the shear amount of what you could do with the damn thing, it made Sony look like amateur programmers at best. If they created half the stuff that modders made legal, PSP would have been unbeatable. Look, PSP could do....


-GBA emulator (and worked like a dream)
-Arcade emulator
-Universal Remote (I could turn on my PS3,TV,Laptop, etc. It was funny when I would go into department stores and fuck with the TVs.
-Media Playlist player (for some ungodly reason Sony has issue making playlist option ON the handheld)
-Instant Messenger App
-Cross Game Music
-Graphic Calculator App
-Even had a basic DS player, I played Pokemon on it :)
-Custom Themes (that you didn't have to pay for)
-Obviously play eboot PSP Games
-Cracked it to do PS1 classics BEFORE Sony even started it.
-etc.


It would be a sin to NOT mod the PSP knowing it could do all these things. Yet none of these harmed it except for the ability to play PSP/PS1 bootlegs. Sony spent most of their time trying to stop the pirates from being able to do any of these things, but never actually thought about making it so they didn't have to mod it to do them. Many of these things they could have made themselves (obviously not the eboot stuff but ya know). Gamers would have met them half way, they would pay for the actual games as long as they could get those cool apps. Once Sony was able to get a handle on blocking all of those goodies, the consumer based stopped buying it entirely. PSP had a plethera of great games, but most of the fans of those games had moved on due to feeling stifled by Sony. Developers also did not take kindly to huge portions of there game's sales be pirated. SE and Rockstar did a study saying that there games were downloaded over 5million times a peice or something. They might not had been able to achieve all those sales but that is a lot of theoretical sales to kiss goodbye.

PS3's issue is something different entirely. I am inclined to blame it on it's price and late start. the only reason 360 outsells PS3 in software is due to the substantial 360 lead in US territory. 360 came out first, and at a cheaper price point than PS3 in the US. American consumers are very......trendy for lack of better term. They want the newest level of product but not the most expensive if they can get the basics for cheaper. In all honesty, its probably the main reason PS2 won last gen. Also, Americans have zero patience for waiting, very impulsive. Once that 360 gained that lead in the US it was going to prove very hard for PS3 to make a dent. Since the recession exploded on the scene, the US has been very anti-Foreign anything. I think this to be part of the reason media outlets are so hard set on assassinating Sony in the press every chance they get, all the while over looking every MS/Apple blunder.

Proof? Only need look at the games themselves. Take a look at the top selling games, and think about there target demographic. We know Japan is not as enthralled with shooters as US/EU is. We know US is not as captivated by JRPGs as JP/EU . Look at the numbers. Games that target the western audience do way better on 360, simply for that fact, most people in the US have a 360. Then look at something like Resident Evil, with a stronger fanbase concentration in Japan, PS3 won that hands down. The thing is is that Western developers create about 2/3rds of all the games these days, and they are usually aimed at Western Audiences.

Also I want to add that it is my assumption that most gamers cannot afford multiple systems. Maybe if they were just Wii owners they have opted to get one of the other two now that the prices have dropped, but to get a 360 and a PS3 seems a bit far reaching. I do not deny that there is probably some overlap but I doubt it is any large number. This just means that many of those that chose 360 or PS3 in the beginning....probably feel obligated to stick with that console for the long haul. I mean lets be honest, I would be damned before I bought a second console after spending $500 on the PS3 :P. Didn't really matter what came out on the 360, it was going to take a true miracle game to persuade me otherwise (Mass Effect was the only coveted jewel 360 had, but now PS3 has it so...). And if you thought paying $500 was far too expensive for a console in the beginning you probably don't want to get another console making it cost more than that in the first place.

So in short, if the roles were reversed as far as market leader, as 360 hadn't gained that foothold on the US, you would be seeing a different picture in software sales for sure. 360 made its strong mark in the US due to its lead, price advantage, and social climate. Wii's success on the otherhand is a total fluke of cercumstances as  far as I'm concerned. They accidently stumbled into their success. Many may disagree, but I think the Wii's rapid decline in the last few years is proof that it WAS a fad all along, a nice shiny new thing that stood out from the pack....but ultimately loses its luster.



      

      

      

Greatness Awaits

PSN:Forevercloud (looking for Soul Sacrifice Partners!!!)

JayWood2010 said:
bananaking21 said:
JayWood2010 said:

Everybody wants to predict how well the PS4/ NeXbox and the WiiU will sell, however people has left out important info on why they think each will sell well.  So here is my question, what does Sony have that will make the PS4 sell well.  Microsoft has Halo and Gears which are both system sellers to a mass amount of people and on top of that the XBOX brand is higher than ever in America, as well as Nintendo having Mario, DK, Zelda, and this list never ends.  Sony has a ton of franchises but does any of them really have that mass appeal that people will just blindly go in and buy the system right off of the bat for a high price?  The two biggest franchises that they have is Uncharted ,God of War, and Gran Turismo, but are they big enough?  

Explain your answers and try not argueing.


LMFAO


Serious question.  Uncharted and God of War are both possibly ending and neither one are 10 million + sellers.  Which leaves it up to gran turismo.


Gears of War isn't a 10+ million seller either so what's your point? Gran Turismo and Uncharted are comperable in terms of popularity to Halo and Gears of War. The only problem is that Sony's Japanese studios are clearly incapable of developing current gen games, I shudder when I think about how grossly inadequate they will be when grappling with game design that's even more complicated. Naughty Dog on the other hand will likely have no issues so I wouldn't be surprised to see Uncharted 4 as a PS4 launch title whereas Polyphony Digital doesn't have a prayer.



bouzane said:
JayWood2010 said:
bananaking21 said:
JayWood2010 said:

Everybody wants to predict how well the PS4/ NeXbox and the WiiU will sell, however people has left out important info on why they think each will sell well.  So here is my question, what does Sony have that will make the PS4 sell well.  Microsoft has Halo and Gears which are both system sellers to a mass amount of people and on top of that the XBOX brand is higher than ever in America, as well as Nintendo having Mario, DK, Zelda, and this list never ends.  Sony has a ton of franchises but does any of them really have that mass appeal that people will just blindly go in and buy the system right off of the bat for a high price?  The two biggest franchises that they have is Uncharted ,God of War, and Gran Turismo, but are they big enough?  

Explain your answers and try not argueing.


LMFAO


Serious question.  Uncharted and God of War are both possibly ending and neither one are 10 million + sellers.  Which leaves it up to gran turismo.


Gears of War isn't a 10+ million seller either so what's your point? Gran Turismo and Uncharted are comperable in terms of popularity to Halo and Gears of War. The only problem is that Sony's Japanese studios are clearly incapable of developing current gen games, I shudder when I think about how grossly inadequate they will be when grappling with game design that's even more complicated. Naughty Dog on the other hand will likely have no issues so I wouldn't be surprised to see Uncharted 4 as a PS4 launch title whereas Polyphony Digital doesn't have a prayer.


When I made this thread I had forgotten about Gran Turismo.  I went back to edit it.  




       

People who buy Sony platforms expect a lot of exclusives and new IP's from Sony, much in the same vein as Nintendo and their vast lists of characters and the same with Microsoft For Halo, Forza, Fable (The only three franchises that ever survive each gen they have). The PS4 will do just fine. Sony wasnt beaten badly by Microsoft since they offer practically the same thing to gamers, one just needs to get their attention first, having a great price point and keep the reasons to own that console going.



S.T.A.G.E. said:
People who buy Sony platforms expect a lot of exclusives and new IP's from Sony, much in the same vein as Nintendo and their vast lists of characters and the same with Microsoft For Halo and shooter fanatics.


The moral of the story is they all have different uses and different types of fans.