| Lawlight said:
Are we really comparing niche, small Wiiware/eShop titles to games that are GOTY contenders? |
Can't fuck with Pushmo.
Who would win the gen? | |||
| Sony | 262 | 51.78% | |
| Microsoft | 26 | 5.14% | |
| Nintendo | 180 | 35.57% | |
| See results | 33 | 6.52% | |
| Total: | 501 | ||
| Lawlight said:
Are we really comparing niche, small Wiiware/eShop titles to games that are GOTY contenders? |
Can't fuck with Pushmo.
Sony, they have the most studios and they have proven that they can make lots of new successful IP's.
Microsoft relies on 3rd party exclusives too much and Nintendo....well if they could make a new successful IP, they would have already done so for the Wii U because if theres a system in need of a new exclusive worth buying it for, its the Wii U (probably the vita too)
Sony>Microsoft>Nintendo
Sony seemed to be much more interested in creating IPs this gen and Sony also has the most first party studios to work on IPs. Microsoft has a load of money and if forced to make new IPs they would probably buy a few studios and invest a lot into them. Nintendo I would assume do the same thing and buy a few studios but there system would hurt tremendously sense Nintendo systems thrive off of the Mario and Zelda games without them I would imagine the system would bomb.
Survivor Millennial vs Gen X!!
If Sony,MS and Nintendo would lose all their best IPs unquestionably Sony would benefit the most of this. Nintendo and Microsoft both have way stronger old IPs than Sony has, Sony IPs are not bad but no one ever really bought a Playstation because of Sony IPs. Sony consoles always was successful because of the 3rd developer games. The people buy Playstations because of Fifa, Final Fantasy, Metal Gear Solid, GTA or Residen Evil. No one byes a Playstation for Killzone, Uncharted or some other Sony crap Games. Sony games have no mass appeal, they never created IPs where people really was interested in.
And there is the difference to the other two companys, the Xbox only survived because of halo, fable,forza and gears of war this are all really strong IPs and almost all of this brands exist since the first xbox. Microsoft would have no success without Halo.
And this story matters even more for Nintendo, no one could ever imagine Nintendo without Mario, Zelda or Pokemon. This brands exists almost 30 years. No one would buy a Nintendo console without nintendo games.
The only console which could be succesfull without exclusive first party games is the playstation and the reason for this is that people never bought playstations because of Sony games.
Why can't MS create a racer with the mass appeal of Gran Turismo then? They've had 5 shots at it now and are still no closer :p
Nintendo make first the gameplay, than choose a character to the game.
If it wasnt Mario, would be other character.
Zero999 said:
don't play dumb. you indirectly said that nintendo's only chance of sucess is scoring a masive hit or starting a "casual craze". |
Stop being paranoid and hyper-sensitive. I never even mentioned Nintendo. I DID NOT say those things whatsoever. I said SONY DOESN'T DEPEND ON THOSE THINGS. Anything else is you reading what you want to read.
You know what the funny thing is, really? I had Kinect Adventures in mind and I was thinking how Sony failed to match that even though they tried during the same time-frame, yet they're still doing pretty good at the moment. Then in comes the people yelling about OMG YOU INSULTED NINTENDO. Honestly, take off the tinfoil hat, you're embarrassing the rest of your fanbase.

bananaking21 said:
|
LOL thanks for the explanation, I guess I'm more a PS fan anyway x)
leyendax69 said:
|
check out our playstation nation thread. its a place where we talk and troll the vita/WiiU/360 discuss playstation products and games

errorpwns said:
From the sounds of it you implied Sony can sell millions of consoles without a massive hit. Which is entirely incorrect. Name one console they've sold that didn't have some kind of huge seller on it? The PS3 was sluggish until a price drop and games like Uncharted started coming onto it attracting gamers. Same with Little Big Planet. The PS2 sold really well, but it also had a huge number of hit games released that boosted its sales. The PS1 was similar. Final fantasy was a big seller as well as GT and Crash Bandicoot and Metal Gear. Add in various JRPGS and bam. The PSP sold well due to Monster Hunter and a few other Japanese hits. |
I have to fix this. Too many things that don't work.
First, Little Big Planet didn't help push anything. It was a cute IP that sold well, but most people who bought it already owned a PS3. Uncharted is different, but no matter how you slice it, one series that maxes 6m isn't the reason any console succeeds. Especially when that's the best you've got. None of those are "huge sellers." The PS2 had a dominace over the market. It had a NES situation. It was abnormal. That's why it could depend on those 3rd party exclusives. Those are all multiplats now. No more FF, Crash Bandicoot, Metal Gear, or GTA exclusives ever. And again, those were all due to multimedia sales. Not Final Fantasy. Not any things. Those helped and those drove momentum, but if Sony released the PS1 without a CD player, there would be no playstation today. The PSP did NOT sell because of Monster Hunter. Is that a joke!?
In regards to this topic though, those are mostly third party games that used to be exclusive. Now that they aren't, they don't sell well enough for Sony to depend on them. Sony would only be able to drive consoles with it's new IP's that sell like shit.
People like to brag about how Sony makes so many new IPs. When only two of your new IP's could reach 5m, you have absolutely nothing to brag about.