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

Forums - Sony - Wait, seriously? Sony's Mascot is Sackboy?

Gearbox on 01 September 2008

There has never been a playstation mascott and wth is ur problem! Do u know anything? Snake is konami not sony!



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 01 September 2008
Aj_habfan said:
forevercloud3000 said:
Crash Bandicoot is a platform game published by Sony Computer Entertainment and developed by Naughty Dog for the PlayStation. It was released in North America on August 31, 1996,[1] in Europe on November 1996,[2] and in Japan on December 6, 1996.[2] The game, as well as being originally released on the PlayStation, was also emulated on the PlayStation Network on December 4, 2006, through which it can be played on the PlayStation Portable and, as of Operating System update 1.70, on the PlayStation 3.[3]

Wikipedia.....a powerful thing....

 

Wikipedia... off again...

 

As for this mascot stuff and the whole "consumers decide" thing, it just means Sony will be marketing this franchise as it's mascot making sure it succeeds.

 

Knowing Sony...it won't last long. LOL...it never does.

 



S.T.A.G.E. on 01 September 2008
Gearbox said:
There has never been a playstation mascott and wth is ur problem! Do u know anything? Snake is konami not sony!

 

Yes there was, Crash was.



S.T.A.G.E. on 01 September 2008
PDF said:
I just want Sony to keep sackboy as the mascot. No more switching.
I cant go through another Crash Bandicoot debacle.

Crash was legendary because he came out of nowhere to take on Mario and with his brand won. Sonic was a awesome bad ass but overall Sega lost.

Mascot helps Brandname. Its their front man that people can associate with.
When you think Sonic you think Sega, When you think Mario you think Nintendo, when you think Master Cheif you think MS, and now when you think Sackboy you will think Playstation.

I do believe that Sony will push a duel mascot feeling once GoW 3 come around you will see Kratos and think Sony as well.

Ninty has ton of "mascots". I think having alot of mascots was the feeling during the ps2 era but now we are getting more of one frontman

 

Crash was the second best selling mascot platformer during the PS1/N64 era. By that time Sonic was wayyyyyy out of the picture. Sonic couldn't touch Mario nor Crash.



kitler53 on 01 September 2008

sackboy. wii. the whole industry is just full of potty humor. xD



Around the Network
thetonestarr on 01 September 2008
Aj_habfan said:
forevercloud3000 said:
Crash Bandicoot is a platform game published by Sony Computer Entertainment and developed by Naughty Dog for the PlayStation. It was released in North America on August 31, 1996,[1] in Europe on November 1996,[2] and in Japan on December 6, 1996.[2] The game, as well as being originally released on the PlayStation, was also emulated on the PlayStation Network on December 4, 2006, through which it can be played on the PlayStation Portable and, as of Operating System update 1.70, on the PlayStation 3.[3]

Wikipedia.....a powerful thing....

 

Wikipedia... off again...

 

As for this mascot stuff and the whole "consumers decide" thing, it just means Sony will be marketing this franchise as it's mascot making sure it succeeds.

 

No, Wikipedia is entirely accurate there. The original Crash Bandicoot game was published by Sony. And Vivendi.

But yes, Vivendi has always owned the rights to the series.

 



 SW-5120-1900-6153

ecurbj on 01 September 2008

Sackboy is a good image for them. I mean at PS1 days, Crash was a nice mascot, then PS2 days, Ratchet and Clank and Jak & Daxter was getting them a nice image and mascot.

Why not have sackboy as a mascot?

It can target and get the mainstream. My two sisters want me to get this game soooooo bad. And they are 17 and 18.



MontanaHatchet on 01 September 2008
ZenfoldorVGI said:

Sony is a kiddy console, confirmed, lol....j/k

Anyway, if LBP had been on a Nintendo console, then some of these fans you see, they would be marginalizing it as a kiddy game, that they hate to play, and they would instead be touting in Killzone 2. These are they hypocrisies of a fanboy.

If it was on 360, the one's currently marginalizing the game would probably put it towards the top of their list.

I've said it many times. I can't get this. I don't have a PS3 currently, and I don't like the look of the game enough to make me want to play it without even a rental. I do think it will sell well, and I also think it might top the gamerankings review scores, because critics would feel like hypocrites, were they to give it anything but perfect scores, after the ravings they've done over the previews.

This game, like Halo 3, and probably Fallout 3, Gears 2, and Resistance 2, are all destined to get AAA review scores, no matter how good or bad they are.

Games like RE5 are also pigeonholed as AA games only, due to their lack of innovation over the last iteration, and generalized impressions from demos, no matter how good, or bad they are. This, despite hyped games such as GTAIV, and Halo 3, which are also replicas of their previous entries, being hyped to hell and given perfect scores.

Wii fans all of a sudden like shooters just because of The Conduit. 360 fans seem to be, out of the blue, large fans of Japanese RPGs just because Microsoft bought off tons of developers. OMG, I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT FANBOYS ARE HYPOCRITES! WHAT A STRANGE AND EXCITING CONCEPT! SURELY THIS CAN'T BE REAL???!!!

Besides, you really believe that developers would give great scores to mediocre games just because they'd look like hypocrites do to their earlier hype of said games? It's a shrewd theory, and I give you credit for it. Funny that you didn't mention any Wii games despite the fact that I could name several of them hyped out of the wazoo (hint: one comes from a shovelware developer). Anyways, if that were true, how come some highly hyped games with positive previews end up with average scores? Remember Lost Planet: Extreme Condition? Besides, the games you mentioned are destined to get good reviews scores because they'll BE good (well except for Fallout 3, not so sure about that one). Halo 3 has an amazing multiplayer experience, despite what many shooter/PC elitists try to say. The first Gears was amazing and the first Resistance was above average, so there's no reason to believe that the sequels won't be at least as good (especially since they won't be rushed).

And why are you picking on Halo 3? Because it's popular? Hell, EGM broke a trend and had one of the reviewers give it a 9.5/10 just for the game. Halo 3 is only the 7th best reviewed game on the 360 (Source: Gamerankings) despite the other two games in the series being in the top 3 rated Xbox games and having higher ratings (let me remind you that Halo 2 has more reviews than Halo 3, bringing the average down). Anyways, if you're complaining about games that were hyped to hell and given perfect scores, why not focus on Super Mario Galaxy and Ocarina of Time? They have higher ratings that they certainly didn't deserve.

 



 

 

stellabelg on 01 September 2008

You both need to chill.



grimygunz on 01 September 2008

happy now