Who is Sony's PS mascot?

Kratos 25 39.68%
 
Nathan Drake 20 31.75%
 
Ratchet and Clank 4 6.35%
 
Helghast 0 0.00%
 
Sackboy 7 11.11%
 
Other 7 11.11%
 
Total:63
SammyGiireal said:
Spindel said:
Sony has none and I see it this way.

In nintendos case Mario is the mascot because he is a versitile character, not a one trick pony. Mario has been used in singel frame platformers, scrolling platformers, golf games, a tennis referee, a boxing referee, fotball games, baseball games, fighting games, puzzle games, racing games, party games etc. This helps building a strong brand around Mario (at a point in time Mario was more recognised than Mickey Mouse, I don’t know if this is true anymore tho). Most (almost all) people in the western world see Mario and know it’s that videogame character and in most cases specifically know it’s that Nintendo game character.

One of Segas failings is that they never made Sonic versitile, it was only a blue spikey character that could go fast. People that are not that invested into videogames will probably recognise it’s a videogame character, but probably won’t make the connection to Sega specifically. Sega should have stuck their guns to their original mascot Alex Kid but fudged it up in their 90ies effort to make a ”rad” mascot for all the ”mature” people playing Megadrive/Genesis. Sonics only saving grace is that he has been around since the 90ies.

Masterchief is just another generic GI Joe actionfigure for non gaming people. MCs brand recognition is close to 0 outside the gaming community.

All of above mentioned characters for team Sony are just one trick ponies and lack the versitility to create a mascot with a strong brand. R&C or Sackboy you probably would be able to make into mascots, buth the other ones nah.

You can always ask if sony needs a mascot and in short: probably not. But it wouldn’t hurt either.

Excellent post. Also IMO Mario and Sonic come from an era were Video Games were marketed almost exclusively towards children and young teens. Having a cute marketable character helped. To be Fair to Sonic the 2-D iterations were excellent and so was the cartoon series around its lore. Mario had few missteps in that area including that one awful live action movie .

Nintendo did much better creating different games in different genres utilizing the Mario Brand, games which were also critically excellent such as Mario kart. Most importantly perhaps Mario was a able to make a spectacular transition into the 3-D realm, where as Sonic Adventure was a good game but not an all time great title. Mario Party, Mario Tennis etc. We're very good games even in the begginng. Heck Mario RPG is considered a classic proving that Nintendo was very cautious  with it's franchise character. Sonic had a few spins off that were mediocre like Sonic R or terrible like the one Sonic title that was a Mario Party clone... I had it on DC and I even forgot its name lol.

Well from my point of view Mario also managed the transition to 3D because he wasn’t a one trick pony. There was a freedom that allowed Mario to do what ever was needed to make 3D feasable. All sonic had was speed and ”blast processing” whitch severley restricted what you could do with him when going 3D.



Around the Network

This is incredibly corny but Crash will always be their mascot in my heart. Doesn't matter if it's multiplat nowadays.

Speaking objectively though, I think Sackboy had a chance but the fact that LBP3 didn't make enough of an impact burned that bridge. Nowadays, I think the closest character they have to a mascot is Kratos. Nathan Drake is of course very popular but I believe his fanbase isn't that large worldwide. Most people love the Uncharted games but don't care that much about him. GoW on the other hand has always shined the brightest due to Kratos' memorable design and personality which used to be really two-dimensional but thankfully they corrected that with the new PS4 game.



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



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.



Around the Network

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



Pancho A. Ovies

Nintendo Switch in Japan (Famitsu): 2018 vs. 2019
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=238945&page=2

PlayStation 4/Xbox One/Nintendo Switch: 2018 vs. 2019
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=239387



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

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

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.