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

Who is Sony's PS mascot?

Kratos 25 39.68%
 
Nathan Drake 20 31.75%
 
Ratchet and Clank 4 6.35%
 
Helghast 0 0%
 
Sackboy 7 11.11%
 
Other 7 11.11%
 
Total:63

They don't have one, thankfully. Each IP can represent itself.



Around the Network

Shiken said:

Sony OWNS the Ratchet and Clank IP.  They have Insomniac handle it, but could pass it to another studio if they saw fit.

 

Helghast are the antagonist race of the Killzone IP, and have had a presence in the PS brand for a long time.

 

Sackboy has had a stong presence on all Sony platforms from the PS3 onward, though he has lost steam with LBP3.  He has been used often in promoting the PS4 overall though.

 

Just because you may not be privy to an aspect of Sony IPs does not mean that those options are null.  Most people know about them, regardless of your personal perception.

If you read my post, I never said Sony does not OWN Ratchet and Clank, I said Sony don't MAKE Ratchet and Clank. There's a difference there. Insomniac made Ratchet and Clank what it is not Sony, Sony just own the IP, a bit like if MS made Alan Wake there mascot even though Remedy made it, it doesn't work. If anything, Ratchet and Clank works better as Insomniac's mascot.

To me, a Mascot needs to be internal, it needs to be created from the inside and represents the brand as a whole, not relying on 2nd or 3rd party devs to make your mascot for you.

Lets be honest here, Helghast? I wouldn't be the only one who doesn't know who that character is.. you cant just throw in a character because they were in a franchise, the character needs to be recognized, they need to be popular outside of gaming. Mario, Sonic, Master Chief are all well known characters inside and outside gaming that not only represent there brands but they lead by good examples. This is why Sackboy and Helghast don't cut it, I would say Knack has a better chance at being the mascot. Even characters like Kratos being a violent character doesn't really make for a great mascot either. Mascots are versatile and flexible characters. Having a character that rips hearts out of his enemies wouldn't be the best idea, however out of that list you mentioned, I would say Kratos comes the closest. Reason I wouldn't put Drake as the mascot is because his not a long term prospect, Kratos is. 



None. Sony’s biggest strength is that they do not need to rely on a mascot. They have managed to make new IPs generation after generation that a bigger than what they had before.
Nintendo and MS need mascots because their devs have failed to make anything that could even come close to their initial successes like Mario/Pokemon/Zelda/Halo/Gears. Sony’s mascot if anything is their top tier devs who can make huge critically acclaimed blockbusters from scratch.



Sony has no mascot. And frankly they don't need one.
The PlayStation brand sells itself. It has since the PS2.





Around the Network
Azzanation said:

Shiken said:

Sony OWNS the Ratchet and Clank IP.  They have Insomniac handle it, but could pass it to another studio if they saw fit.

 

Helghast are the antagonist race of the Killzone IP, and have had a presence in the PS brand for a long time.

 

Sackboy has had a stong presence on all Sony platforms from the PS3 onward, though he has lost steam with LBP3.  He has been used often in promoting the PS4 overall though.

 

Just because you may not be privy to an aspect of Sony IPs does not mean that those options are null.  Most people know about them, regardless of your personal perception.

If you read my post, I never said Sony does not OWN Ratchet and Clank, I said Sony don't MAKE Ratchet and Clank. There's a difference there. Insomniac made Ratchet and Clank what it is not Sony, Sony just own the IP, a bit like if MS made Alan Wake there mascot even though Remedy made it, it doesn't work. If anything, Ratchet and Clank works better as Insomniac's mascot.

To me, a Mascot needs to be internal, it needs to be created from the inside and represents the brand as a whole, not relying on 2nd or 3rd party devs to make your mascot for you.

Lets be honest here, Helghast? I wouldn't be the only one who doesn't know who that character is.. you cant just throw in a character because they were in a franchise, the character needs to be recognized, they need to be popular outside of gaming. Mario, Sonic, Master Chief are all well known characters inside and outside gaming that not only represent there brands but they lead by good examples. This is why Sackboy and Helghast don't cut it, I would say Knack has a better chance at being the mascot. Even characters like Kratos being a violent character doesn't really make for a great mascot either. Mascots are versatile and flexible characters. Having a character that rips hearts out of his enemies wouldn't be the best idea, however out of that list you mentioned, I would say Kratos comes the closest. Reason I wouldn't put Drake as the mascot is because his not a long term prospect, Kratos is. 

Fair enough.  While I may not agree with your stance about the poll choices, you do make sound points to support your opinion.  We will just have to agree to disagree about the validity of those choices.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

BoseDK said:
None. Sony’s biggest strength is that they do not need to rely on a mascot. They have managed to make new IPs generation after generation that a bigger than what they had before.
Nintendo and MS need mascots because their devs have failed to make anything that could even come close to their initial successes like Mario/Pokemon/Zelda/Halo/Gears. Sony’s mascot if anything is their top tier devs who can make huge critically acclaimed blockbusters from scratch.

Splatoon says hi.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

Shiken said:
BoseDK said:
None. Sony’s biggest strength is that they do not need to rely on a mascot. They have managed to make new IPs generation after generation that a bigger than what they had before.
Nintendo and MS need mascots because their devs have failed to make anything that could even come close to their initial successes like Mario/Pokemon/Zelda/Halo/Gears. Sony’s mascot if anything is their top tier devs who can make huge critically acclaimed blockbusters from scratch.

Splatoon says hi.

Splatoon is a successful new IP for Nintendo, in a long time, but on the level of Mario/Zelda? I don't think so.

I'm talking about the fact that Sony's studios are able to make things more successful than their last time and again.

Naughty Dog under Sony went from Jak to Uncharted and followed it up with The Last of Us, each bigger than the last.

Guerrilla Games went from Killzone to Horizon Zero Dawn. Suckerpunch went from Sly Cooper to Infamous to. Ghost of Tsushima.

Nintendo has basically been surviving on the few IPs that put them on the map 2-3 decades ago and have failed to recapture the lightning again since then. Maybe they just don't have the talent anymore or are too scared to invest big money into new IPs, either way they would be nothing without Mario/Zelda/Pokemon. While you can take every IP Sony has and they it wouldn't hurt them any all as they'll make new IPs that are bigger than anything they had.



BoseDK said:
Shiken said:

Splatoon says hi.

Splatoon is a successful new IP for Nintendo, in a long time, but on the level of Mario/Zelda? I don't think so.

I'm talking about the fact that Sony's studios are able to make things more successful than their last time and again.

Naughty Dog under Sony went from Jak to Uncharted and followed it up with The Last of Us, each bigger than the last.

Guerrilla Games went from Killzone to Horizon Zero Dawn. Suckerpunch went from Sly Cooper to Infamous to. Ghost of Tsushima.

Nintendo has basically been surviving on the few IPs that put them on the map 2-3 decades ago and have failed to recapture the lightning again since then. Maybe they just don't have the talent anymore or are too scared to invest big money into new IPs, either way they would be nothing without Mario/Zelda/Pokemon. While you can take every IP Sony has and they it wouldn't hurt them any all as they'll make new IPs that are bigger than anything they had.

Splatoon 2 has already outsold at least half of the Zelda games.  Not every game sells like Twilight Princess, Ocarina of Time, or Breath of the Wild.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

Shiken said:
BoseDK said:

Splatoon is a successful new IP for Nintendo, in a long time, but on the level of Mario/Zelda? I don't think so.

I'm talking about the fact that Sony's studios are able to make things more successful than their last time and again.

Naughty Dog under Sony went from Jak to Uncharted and followed it up with The Last of Us, each bigger than the last.

Guerrilla Games went from Killzone to Horizon Zero Dawn. Suckerpunch went from Sly Cooper to Infamous to. Ghost of Tsushima.

Nintendo has basically been surviving on the few IPs that put them on the map 2-3 decades ago and have failed to recapture the lightning again since then. Maybe they just don't have the talent anymore or are too scared to invest big money into new IPs, either way they would be nothing without Mario/Zelda/Pokemon. While you can take every IP Sony has and they it wouldn't hurt them any all as they'll make new IPs that are bigger than anything they had.

Splatoon 2 has already outsold at least half of the Zelda games.  Not every game sells like Twilight Princess, Ocarina of Time, or Breath of the Wild.

Yes, not every Zelda game sells like those 3, and not every game with Mario in it sells great either, but the point I'm making is that only these old Nintendo IPs are able to get critical acclaim and sell huge numbers. Nintendo's devs just don't have what it takes to get results without nostalgia it seems.