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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Nintendo 1st party actually reminds me of Microsoft 1st party or vise versa

Slade6alpha said:
Intrinsic said:

Kinda silly using that as a comeback... at least guerilla cambridge FINISHED and released their game.  When is scalebound releasing again?

Was more along a retailiation to his obvious bait comment, but whatever; harp on semantics. 

Yeah I know what you were trying to do..... just pointing out that it makes litle sense doing it using a studio that actually released their game before they got shut down as an example.



Around the Network

Dunno, there's too few games coming from MS 1st party to judge them. I think there's only like 3 franchises they do anymore, 1 is a car game, the other 2 don't seem less cinematic than Uncharted or Killzone.

I think the library of Sony is so big you can make a claim that they do gameplay, cinematic and artsy titles all at once. They just have so many games. It's unfair to compare them.



badgenome said:
I wouldn't really phrase it like that, but we've long since reached a point where, when I see a lot of Sony's first party games revealed at E3 or somewhere, I feel like I've already seen it before. Uncharted looks like Last of Us looks Infamous looks like the new God of War in the long, drawn out, masturbatorily cinematic sections they tend to like to show at those things.

I'm not sure that would really hold up if you compared the entire first party line ups, but it's definitely something that occurred to me.

I think this is largely true across all platforms and all  AAA developers.  Games are *mostly* the same as the games that came before.  That's natural.  Huge money is spent making most big games.  Risks, such as trying unproven mechanics or genres, are very difficult to justify.  Many millions can be lost if things don't work out as hoped.



ps4 also has games like gravity rush, bloodborne, ratchet and clank, the last guardian etc.



It's already been but Sony first party games are about gameplay or gameplay + cinematic experience. MS and Nintendo create games that are very similar from generation to generation.



Around the Network

I don't even understand the argument of "cinematic" at this point.

Dead rising 3(and 4), Ryse, Quantum break, and SSO all have cut scenes.
I'm fairly sure Halo and Gears do too.

Nintendo games do tend to have less cutscenes once you get past the intro. The issue is that intro is long and can't be skipped.



  • Deadliest mass shooting by an individual in US history (10/01/2017)
  • Deadliest high school shooting in US history (02/14/2018)
  • Deadliest massacre of Jews in US history (10/27/2018)
  • Political assassination attempt of TWO former presidents(and 10+ other people)  (10/23/2018 - and beyond)
Slade6alpha said:
pokoko said:

I'm not sure I understand.  Those count but not Alienation?  Bloodborne?  Bound, Driveclub, Fat Princess?  Gran Turismo?  Gravity Rush?  HotShots Golf?  MLB: The Show?  Nioh?  Dead Nation?  LBP, Resogun, Super Stardust?  Helldivers?

Yeah, it's a misleading argument that only works if you close one eye and pretend.

Well I was just adding that because the other guy added Dragon quest, and Ni No Kuni, but whatever. Pretty sure MS owns Ori though... so...

I only mentioned games published by Sony, most of which are owned by them, as well.  

The OP is just using a misleading argument from the start.

1 - Offer a premise.

2 - List examples that support your argument.

3 - Omit examples that do not support your argument.



Turkish said:
Dunno, there's too few games coming from MS 1st party to judge them. I think there's only like 3 franchises they do anymore, 1 is a car game, the other 2 don't seem less cinematic than Uncharted or Killzone.

I think the library of Sony is so big you can make a claim that they do gameplay, cinematic and artsy titles all at once. They just have so many games. It's unfair to compare them.

Exactly, its easy to make this argument if you just pretend all the other games that disputes the claim don't exist.

In truth, I think if some people actually took the time to look at the amount of games and new IPs sony actually makes they would at least be very impressed. 

Just this gen alone sony has 8 NEW IPs that we know of or have been released..... and I only counted the full retail games and none of the digital only titles. And at least three of that eigth stand to become a new franchise. and i didn't add their already existing and continuing franchises.

And all those games span the spectrum of sony variety ranging from story focused to gameplay focused.

But yet we compare this to MS?



VAMatt said:

I think this is largely true across all platforms and all  AAA developers.  Games are *mostly* the same as the games that came before.  That's natural.  Huge money is spent making most big games.  Risks, such as trying unproven mechanics or genres, are very difficult to justify.  Many millions can be lost if things don't work out as hoped.

To a degree, sure, but Sony really likes to choose those super long, cinematic sequences like the hunting scene from GOW or the Uncharted one with Chloe in Derkaderkastan from PSX recently. It always gives me an overwhelming sense of deja vu.



I just find this thread extremely misleading.

I don't think there is any way anyone can reasonably compare sony first/second party to that of MS. Nintendo Maybe, but definitely not MS.