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

Forums - Sony - Shuhei Yoshida "'Hates' Annualized Franchises"

QUAKECore89 on 06 February 2015

Finally...



Around the Network
dukerx2 on 06 February 2015

I love PlayStation executives, always entertaining and mostly honest. Shu, Kaz, Tretton, Boyes...Kevin Butler.



estebxx on 06 February 2015
pokoko said:
He's absolutely right. Development should tell Marketing when a game is ready to release, not the other way around.

I adore this man.
Aerys said:
Thats true Sony are the one making the less annual franchise these last years

gotta agree with both of you guys and with Shu, i used to be a fan of Assassins Creed and COD back in 2007 up to 2009 and the reason why those games died to me was the fact that they became annualized franchises... i just cant see myself playing the SAME games every year, plus the leaps from this games to their sequels is never as impressive to the leaps that games like MGS (or any other non-annualized franchise) gets with its sequels, since they get more time in the "oven".



raidinglarastomb on 06 February 2015
Player2 said:

"And that's why we made three SingStar and Buzz games per year instead of one until we burned them". He forgot to say.

Regarding the early days of PlayStation:


had the original this is football , can remember I kept getting sent off for diving



old skool

raidinglarastomb on 06 February 2015
estebxx said:
pokoko said:
He's absolutely right. Development should tell Marketing when a game is ready to release, not the other way around.

I adore this man.
Aerys said:
Thats true Sony are the one making the less annual franchise these last years

gotta agree with both of you guys and with Shu, i used to be a fan of Assassins Creed and COD back in 2007 up to 2009 and the reason why those games died to me was the fact that they became annualized franchises... i just cant see myself playing the SAME games every year, plus the leaps from this games to their sequels is never as impressive to the leaps that games like MGS (or any other non-annualized franchise) gets with its sequels, since they get more time in the "oven".

totally agree with this, but you cant blame the marketing/sales teams if people are stupid enough to buy them every year. I think sports games should be like 20 euro update every year or something like that.



old skool

Around the Network
estebxx on 06 February 2015
raidinglarastomb said:
estebxx said:
pokoko said:
He's absolutely right. Development should tell Marketing when a game is ready to release, not the other way around.

I adore this man.
Aerys said:
Thats true Sony are the one making the less annual franchise these last years

gotta agree with both of you guys and with Shu, i used to be a fan of Assassins Creed and COD back in 2007 up to 2009 and the reason why those games died to me was the fact that they became annualized franchises... i just cant see myself playing the SAME games every year, plus the leaps from this games to their sequels is never as impressive to the leaps that games like MGS (or any other non-annualized franchise) gets with its sequels, since they get more time in the "oven".

totally agree with this, but you cant blame the marketing/sales teams if people are stupid enough to buy them every year. I think sports games should be like 20 euro update every year or something like that.

yeah pretty much agree with that, sometime people really are to blame... i dont know how people can play COD or AC year after year after year, i personally get bored to death. and yeah sports game are basically just updates and they should be cheaper, but that will never happen since they sell so well.



WagnerPaiva on 06 February 2015
BraLoD said:
WagnerPaiva said:


I haven´t finished the first one yet =/


Did you started it? It's kinda hard to get lost on it xD


Yes, I am playing on Vita. I am just lazy.



My grammar errors are justified by the fact that I am a brazilian living in Brazil. I am also very stupid.

Samus Aran on 07 February 2015
pokoko said:
Player2 said:

"And that's why we made three SingStar and Buzz games per year instead of one until we burned them". He forgot to say.

Regarding the early days of PlayStation:

Are you really trying to use sports games to negate what he's saying?  Seriously?  Games which are annual by necessity and generally easy to develop?  As opposed to franchises which have no actual need for annual entries and have to be rushed to fit schedules?  

Do you really have no understanding of what he's really talking about here?

Why are annual sports games a necessity? There's something called a patch.



Player2 on 07 February 2015
outlawauron said:
Player2 said:
outlawauron said:

But this is false. Publishers who hold these licenses are contractually required to release a new version every year. If they don't, they risk losing the license.

I was talking from a technical standpoint, but I seriously doubt that would happen. In fact, EA didn't lose the NBA license when they stopped making NBA Live and Sega didn't lose the ATP license.

EA was forced go through the process in order to re-release the series. I have no idea what the case was with Sega and ATP. I didn't even know it existed.

I do know from people who work in EA Sports, that they can't not release/delay their game. They have hard dates to meet.

So they actually lost their old contract. It's kinda understandable, given that they acted unlilaterally. However I have a hard time believing that things would happen this way when trying to sign a new contract:

Mr. EA - Last night I received the visit of the three christmas ghosts* and I think that we should make a game and then support it with yearly DLC updates (also available at retail at a discount price) until the next game is tested enough and properly finished. That way we can offer a better and more polished product for our customers which will be better in the long term.

Blatter's minion - Sorry Mr. EA, unless it's full retail games every year we don't want your money.

 

* I'm trying my best to make it believable.

 

BMaker11 said:
Player2 said:

I was talking from a technical standpoint, but I seriously doubt that would happen. In fact, EA didn't lose the NBA license when they stopped making NBA Live and Sega didn't lose the ATP license.

Sports licenses are pretty much open to anyone willing to make the game. Only license that was "lost" was NFL, due to EA making an exclusive deal because ESPN 2K5 beat the brakes off Madden that year and Madden is their bread and butter. Everything else seems to be fair game. There's FIFA and PES (if PES made a far superior game and made is $25 MSRP, soccer might get "Madden'd" and become exlusive). There was MLB: The Show and  MLB 2K. EA NHL and NHL 2K. Etc

At this point, 2K Sports could easily make an exclusive deal to get the NBA license (2K >>>> Live)...but they aren't dicks. For most sports games, the dev just needs to renew their license. But they don't ever "lose" it, unless they are legally unable to get a license due to exclusivity.

EA has the Fifa license in exclusive. That's why PES has to rely in smaller licenses (Champions League, etc) and fill the remaining gaps with fake teams.



thatguymarco on 07 February 2015

I love this man.



I'm now filled with determination.