Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony doesn't need more 1st party studios

Does Sony have way too many Exclusives and multiplats not on Xbox?

Yes 11 24.44%
 
No 30 66.67%
 
IDK? 4 8.89%
 
Total:45

As a gamer that does not own any Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft stock, I have no interest in exclusive games. They don't benefit gamers in any way. So, I'd prefer that all games be multi-platform. In that sense, I hope that the hardware guys stop buying developers (unless they're going to handle all games like MS has handled Minecraft, and put it on every possible system).



Around the Network

Well, as with most people i do think sony exclusives have been a par above this gen. However while the ps4 has had a number of really good games, i feel they havent made the attempts or tried the variety that we got with the ps3. Gems the ps3 had such as R1-3, Puppeteer, Motorstorm, PSA battle royale, Mag . Even HR which was a risk at the time. When sony wasn't doing so well they put a lot of effort into funding a bunch of kooky games. It feela like they haven't bothered this time and i find that disappointing.



fauzman said:
Well, as with most people i do think sony exclusives have been a par above this gen. However while the ps4 has had a number of really good games, i feel they havent made the attempts or tried the variety that we got with the ps3. Gems the ps3 had such as R1-3, Puppeteer, Motorstorm, PSA battle royale, Mag . Even HR which was a risk at the time. When sony wasn't doing so well they put a lot of effort into funding a bunch of kooky games. It feela like they haven't bothered this time and i find that disappointing.

I dunno. I dont think it so much that they arent funding stuff not normal for them as much as them finding a groove which works best for them. They still have the odd stuff like Tomorrow Children, Astrobot, counterspy, until dawn, playroom. They have VR and Playlink initiatives and PixelOpus has made Entwined and will release Concrete genie. 

I mean, I get what you are saying but the game variety is there. But I suppose it is not as apparent as PS3 days.



Don't punish Sony, for MS not having enough exclusives. It's MS's fault that they'd rather seem to focus of different colored controllers and such, rather than games.



The_Liquid_Laser said:
DonFerrari said:

That doesn't mean they discontinued GT. Studio still exists and they may be working on a GT7 or not, but even if you don't like GTS, consider it another game or doesn't sell much doesn't mean it was discontinued.

Didn't say I "know" its discontinued.  Just saying it seems that way.  GT6 came out 5 years ago and we haven't heard anything about GT7 yet.

There's no need for more than one Gran Turismo per generation. Same with MLB The Show, or any other sports/racing games. These should come out once per gen and then have continued support and DLC packs for the rest of the generation.

 

OT: Sony seems to be going a certain way with their studios which seems to be the exact opposite of the direction MS is taking judging by the studios they've acquired. From what I can see MS wants a steady stream of small titles to keep people subscribed to gamepass to check out the next game, none of their studios can be considered a great developer who's going to put out a GOTY contender. Sony on the other hand is nurturing their studios to put out generation defining titles even if it means they make only one or in some cases two games per generation, they essentially want each other their studios to be on the level of Rockstar or CDPR. So far it seems to be working too, they seem to put out GOTY contenders pretty much every year (since 2008 the only year Sony has not had a game in the top 5 GOTY winners was in 2014) and the sales of their games have skyrocketed this generation as well. If they can put out two games on the level of God of War and Spiderman every year then yeah they don't need more than that. Especially considering we know they're doubling the sizes of Guerrilla Games and Santa Monica so they can work on two full productions simultaneously, and they have a new studio in San Diego. Perhaps do the same with Naughty Dog, and Suckerpunch and they'll be golden.



Around the Network
Sahib said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

Didn't say I "know" its discontinued.  Just saying it seems that way.  GT6 came out 5 years ago and we haven't heard anything about GT7 yet.

There's no need for more than one Gran Turismo per generation. Same with MLB The Show, or any other sports/racing games. These should come out once per gen and then have continued support and DLC packs for the rest of the generation.

 

OT: Sony seems to be going a certain way with their studios which seems to be the exact opposite of the direction MS is taking judging by the studios they've acquired. From what I can see MS wants a steady stream of small titles to keep people subscribed to gamepass to check out the next game, none of their studios can be considered a great developer who's going to put out a GOTY contender. Sony on the other hand is nurturing their studios to put out generation defining titles even if it means they make only one or in some cases two games per generation, they essentially want each other their studios to be on the level of Rockstar or CDPR. So far it seems to be working too, they seem to put out GOTY contenders pretty much every year (since 2008 the only year Sony has not had a game in the top 5 GOTY winners was in 2014) and the sales of their games have skyrocketed this generation as well. If they can put out two games on the level of God of War and Spiderman every year then yeah they don't need more than that. Especially considering we know they're doubling the sizes of Guerrilla Games and Santa Monica so they can work on two full productions simultaneously, and they have a new studio in San Diego. Perhaps do the same with Naughty Dog, and Suckerpunch and they'll be golden.

I have never thought that way, but certainly for gamepass it will be much more profitable to keep chunneling smaller games that the subs itself pays the cost than make games that need 5M sales at full price, because the subs won't pay those.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994