• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

NPD Sales Results for November 2015 [Up3: Combined Hardware For PS4 + XB1 + Wii U]

Melchiah

Member
Sep 21, 2006
26,751
48
1,385
45
Helsinki, Finland
www.youtube.com
I have been gaming for over 30 years. Been involved when I was a child (Sega vs. SNES, argued SNES was more powerful, yet I loved and owned more of the Genesis software), and witnessed every console war. I never seen the goal posts move from what is considered an exclusive IP with the "1st and 2nd" BS, like I have this gen. It was mentioned last gen, but not to try and discredit a game being exclusive, it was just to show a developer was not owned by the console publisher.

Another thing is, that for the past two generations, when the XB platform often had the best versions of 3rd party titles, even smaller differences than resolution were important factors, unlike now when the shoe is on the other foot. If the power balance changes back to their favor next gen, I imagine we'll see a shift towards the older narrative.
 

QaaQer

Member
Jun 13, 2012
11,333
0
0
Sony 's been known for a long time to release or support more "weird" stuff than any other big player in the industry.

Why put weird in quotes? If it is because you are recognizing that the stuff is only weird in the context of big corporate emtertainment products, then that is the same point I am making. SCEI is big business and that's why you'd never see actual weird games like Dwarf Fortress, Minecraft, or League of Legends coming out of there.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
46,833
94,627
1,380
Another thing is, that for the past two generations, when the XB platform often had the best versions of 3rd party titles, even smaller differences than resolution were important factors, unlike now when the shoe is on the other foot. If the power balance changes back to their favor next gen, I imagine we'll see a shift towards the older narrative.

This is very true. It has always been about power with consoles. "Blast Processing vs. on screen colors", 8-bit vs. 16-bit, etc.

Now all of a sudden the differences do not matter (unless PC is dragged in of course still). SMH.

Gamers gonna game.
 

Bgamer90

Banned
Mar 20, 2007
20,961
0
0
I have been gaming for over 30 years. Been involved when I was a child (Sega vs. SNES, argued SNES was more powerful, yet I loved and owned more of the Genesis software), and witnessed every console war. I never seen the goal posts move from what is considered an exclusive IP with the "1st and 2nd" BS, like I have this gen. It was mentioned last gen, but not to try and discredit a game being exclusive, it was just to show a developer was not owned by the console publisher.

The "1st party, 2nd party" stuff came up pretty frequently during the last half of last gen. Especially the "this doesn't count since it's on PC" lines. Some have flipped flopped on that too (on both sides) since a decent amount of Playstation console exclusives are hitting PC too.

The "indie games aren't real games" has been a popular line of (in my opinion, shortsighted) thinking for a while now though; Didn't start this gen.

________________________

Another thing is, that for the past two generations, when the XB platform often had the best versions of 3rd party titles, even smaller differences than resolution were important factors, unlike now when the shoe is on the other foot. If the power balance changes back to their favor next gen, I imagine we'll see a shift towards the older narrative.

And some PS fans didn't care about having the best multiplats as much as they do now. The success of the PS2 alone can back this up considering how well the PS2 did after the Xbox launched (with the gap between Xbox and PS2 being the biggest power gap for any modern gaming gen); The "gameplay/fun over graphics" line was pretty popular on the Playstation forums during the PS2 and PS3 gens.

There are hypocrites all over.
 

hawk2025

Member
Jan 20, 2013
15,489
0
0
Discussing a giant field of vague strawmen isn't exactly productive, guys.


Why put weird in quotes? If it is because you are recognizing that the stuff is only weird in the context of big corporate emtertainment products, then that is the same point I am making. SCEI is big business and that's why you'd never see actual weird games like Dwarf Fortress, Minecraft, or League of Legends coming out of there.


Let's try to list some:


Parappa The Rapper
Vib Ribbon
Dreams
Little Big Planet
Jumping Flash
Twisted Metal
Tomba
Devil Dice
Ape Escape
FantaVision
Ico
Shadow of the Colossus
Mad Maestro
Mister Mosquito
Frequency/Amplitude
Warhawk
Calling All Cars
LocoRoco
Patapon
Afrika
Echochrome
The Last Guy
.detuned
Fat Princess
Flow/Flower/Journey
Pain
Datura
The Unfinished Swan
Tokyo Jungle
Doki-Doki Universe
Hohokum
Rain
Escape Plan
Tearaway/ Tearaway Unfolded




In short -- complete nonsense. They've been publishing, funding, and making a gigantic variety of unique games for decades.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
46,833
94,627
1,380
The "1st party, 2nd party" stuff came up pretty frequently during the last half of last gen. Especially the "this doesn't count since it's on PC" lines. Some have flipped flopped on that too (on both sides) since a decent amount of Playstation console exclusives are hitting PC too.

The "indie games aren't real games" has been a popular line of (in my opinion, shortsighted) thinking for a while now though; Didn't start this gen.

________________________



And some PS fans didn't care about having the best multiplats as much as they do now. The "gameplay/fun over graphics" line was pretty popular on the Playstation forums during the PS2 and PS3 gens. There are hypocrites all over.

The gameplay vs. graphics really took off hardcore with the Wii. Like really fucking hardcore narrative (because you CAN have BOTH, lol). Then we all found out, you can sit down and waggle that shit in the majority of the games (a few stand outs that really utilized it), and people wanted that classic Pro Pad again.

I agree about the Indie BS as well.
 

Primethius

Banned
Jan 20, 2008
17,874
0
0
U.S.
twitter.com
Why put weird in quotes? If it is because you are recognizing that the stuff is only weird in the context of big corporate emtertainment products, then that is the same point I am making. SCEI is big business and that's why you'd never see actual weird games like Dwarf Fortress, Minecraft, or League of Legends coming out of there.

In what world is something like Until Dawn or Bloodborne not as weird as League of Legends?

I'm confused as to the criteria now. Sales? Critical Reception? Genre acceptance?

Cause League sure as hell wasn't a unique game or a weird game back when it came out. It blew up big, sure. But weird? What.
 
Jun 21, 2013
7,068
1
435
Virginia, United States
Why put weird in quotes? If it is because you are recognizing that the stuff is only weird in the context of big corporate emtertainment products, then that is the same point I am making. SCEI is big business and that's why you'd never see actual weird games like Dwarf Fortress, Minecraft, or League of Legends coming out of there.
Those games are mainstream and standardized as all hell.
 

StevieP

Banned
Sep 10, 2006
12,045
0
0
The gameplay vs. graphics really took off hardcore with the Wii. Like really fucking hardcore narrative (because you CAN have BOTH, lol). Then we all found out, you can sit down and waggle that shit in the majority of the games (a few stand outs that really utilized it), and people wanted that classic Pro Pad again.

I agree about the Indie BS as well.

Speaking of straw men arguments using anecdotal barometers in this thread...

There is subjectivity and there is objectivity. Subjectively, waggle wasn't your cup of tea. Objectively, the evolution of motion control is going to be a requirement for good VR.
 
Jul 7, 2014
13,608
0
0
United Sates
So what they did right was give From money to make Bloodborne and let the Until Dawn team salvage an old move game, which they then provided zero marketing for? Dont forget that the only reason bloodborne exists is because Sony thought Demon's Souls was garbage.

I think shu and wws are competent and workmanlike. They make and fund decent aaa games with reasonable budgets that stick to well trod focus grouped paths. In short, they are a corporation making mass market products. Idk why anyone would expect anything more from them.

And yes they do occasionally release interesting titles like Everyone's Gone to Rapture. But their involvement isnt anything different from EA or whatever. This is what the director Jessica Curry wrote about it,



It is best with Sony games to expect nothing but middle of the road AAA stuff.

Gravity Rush 2, The Last Guardian, Until Dawn is middle of the road stuff? I believe Sony will continue to push boudaries.

Media Molecule's Dreams and Quantic Dream's Detroit are enough to shut down your line of thought that Sony is done taking risks.
 

hawk2025

Member
Jan 20, 2013
15,489
0
0
Speaking of straw men arguments using anecdotal barometers in this thread...

There is subjectivity and there is objectivity. Subjectively, waggle wasn't your cup of tea. Objectively, the evolution of motion control is going to be a requirement for good VR.

Good point.

Like it or not, Wiimote "waggle" was embrionic for the kind of advanced control approaches that every single VR device will be pushing next year.
 

benny_a

extra source of jiggaflops
Apr 25, 2009
17,350
1
0
Those games are mainstream and standardized as all hell.
While the lineage for Minecraft can be traced easily and League of Legends was just another implementation of an already popular mod I think Dwarf Fortress is quite unique.
The circumstances and implementations made those other two, not the idea.

Of course that doesn't mean QaaQer isn't talking rubbish.
 

sörine

Banned
Sep 1, 2013
7,582
0
0
But in Nintendo's case, it's out of desperation. Just like how out of desperation Sony pushed for games like Echochrome, Fat Princess, Puppeteer etc. on PS3, and Sega with games like Space Channel 5, Jet Grind Radio and Sea-man on Dreamcast. History tends to prove that competition and desperation directly influence the level of risk-taking publishers often take, and I'd say it's competition from the indie circuit that is fueling some of the PS4 content like Dreams, which I'm personally very excited and happy about.

What it means at the end of the day though is just down to subjective taste, but personally I don't see what Nintendo's doing being in the same league as what Sony or Sega did w/ PS3 and Dreamcast, not even close tbh. I don't care much for otaku or anime-driven licensed games and outside of efforts like Splatoon Nintendo's pushes have been more window-dressing, otherwise covering well-trodden ground for them. That'd help to explain a large reason for Wii U's current plight.
I'm not sure how true that really is, given Sony's most progressive period for localization (PS1 era) was certainly a lot less desparate than their worst (PSP/PS3 era). We'll see how they swing this gen, but Vita's treatment and early abandonment doesn't make a very great case for desperation yielding localization either. Same for Sega (Saturn) or Nintendo (Gamecube) in dark times. Nintendo would be fine fine riding out Wii U and sunsetting 3DS without bringing a lot of the games they are.

Also, window dressing? I'm going to chalk that up to ignorance on your part but NOA/NOE have put serious commitment not only behind their own offbeat localizations (Xenoblade X, Codename STEAM, Tomodachi Life, Splatoon, etc) but also 3rd party efforts (Bravely Default, Yo-Kai Watch, Bayonetta 2, Inazuma Eleven, etc). They've even put it behind games they didn't even publish it in some cases, like Monster Hunter. It's not just Mario and Zelda Nintendo puts serious backing behind, even if some localizations do draw the short straw in this area. When you localize 20+ Japanese games a year not everything is going to get a big push. Of course when you localize less than 5 Japanese games in a year as well they also don't all get the big push either, as Sony's shown us this year.
 

BradleyLove

Member
Oct 18, 2008
1,417
7
780
Why put weird in quotes? If it is because you are recognizing that the stuff is only weird in the context of big corporate emtertainment products, then that is the same point I am making. SCEI is big business and that's why you'd never see actual weird games like Dwarf Fortress, Minecraft, or League of Legends coming out of there.

Seems you've erroneously attributed a quote to me there.
 

Jigorath

Banned
Aug 22, 2013
12,903
4
0
twitter.com
sörine;190550957 said:
Xenoblade didn't take a year, it was about 7 months. Which is slightly faster than Oreshika actually, and that's with a retail release worldwide. Also while Yoshi's American delay was confounding, it actually released in Europe first before Japan so it's probably not the best example to cite when claiming Nintendo localizations take forever.

Your Sony list is also confusing when we're talking about Japanese localization and you bring up European made games like Murasaki Baby (Italy) or Hokohum (UK). I'm not saying Sony's a risk averse pub in general, their curated indie picks are top notch, but their Japanese localization efforts have sort of floundered as SCE has moved more and more more western focused during the 2000s.

Nintendo's not the gold standard either, they make tons of mistakes all the time. But they are lightyears ahead of Sony and MS here in this one regard, whether it works out for them (Splatoon, Bravely Default, Tomodachi Life, etc) or not (Wonderful 101, Codename STEAM, Yo-Kai Watch, etc). You just don't see the other hardware makers putting these sorts of resources into Japanese development and localization, and it's a shame because both Sony and MS seemed much better on this front in the past.

You said

sörine;190546292 said:
You don't see Sony taking risks on things like Codename STEAM, DQ remakes, Devil's Third, LBX, etc.

which is completely untrue. Sony localizes pretty much everything they release in Japan nowadays, even extremely niche stuff that has no hope of selling. The last time they passed on a localization was Demon's Souls and they learned from that mistake.
 

viHuGi

Banned
Jun 23, 2015
4,035
1
0
Portugal
Gravity Rush 2, The Last Guardian, Until Dawn is middle of the road stuff? I believe Sony will continue to push boudaries.

Media Molecule's Dreams and Quantic Dream's Detroit are enough to shut down your line of thought that Sony is done taking risks.

Sony is the best!

Still getting NX for Nintendo games <3
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
46,833
94,627
1,380
Speaking of straw men arguments using anecdotal barometers in this thread...

There is subjectivity and there is objectivity. Subjectively, waggle wasn't your cup of tea. Objectively, the evolution of motion control is going to be a requirement for good VR.

Oh I can agree with evolution, I am only speaking at the time. And it is not subjective, that you can sit and play Wii Tennis, by flicking the wrist, and not doing these elaborate standing motions as advertised. That was my point truthfully. Once that was figured out, the "magic" wore off, which made the "gameplay over graphics" narrative carry less weight. When in fact, you can have BOTH. One is not needed to not exist because of the other. It is a stupid argument,.
 
Jun 21, 2013
7,068
1
435
Virginia, United States
While the lineage for Minecraft can be traced easily and League of Legends was just another implementation of an already popular mod I think Dwarf Fortress is quite unique.
The circumstances and implementations made those other two, not the idea.

Of course that doesn't mean QaaQer isn't talking rubbish.
I'll give you that, and yeah I got no idea how QaaQer's convinced themselves what they're saying is true :\

In what universe are games like The Tomorrow Children, Bound, Dreams, ect not weird or unusual.
Especially Dreams. That alone is is looking to be my GOTG based on what's out/is in dev so far. Simply b/c of the possibilities from a creative POV. Can't wait to create stuff in it.
 

prwxv3

Member
Sep 7, 2011
7,479
2
0
I'll give you that, and yeah I got no idea how QaaQer's convinced themselves what they're saying is true :

Especially Dreams. That alone is is looking to be my GOTG based on what's out/is in dev so far. Simply b/c of the possibilities from a creative POV. Can't wait to create stuff in it.

Dreams is quite possible the craziest thing Sony have ever greenlit with a decent sized budget (?).
 

orochi91

Member
Jan 10, 2014
12,427
0
550
Going back to my comment last night, I just don't see enough time for most of Sony WWS to even pump out 2 AAA games this gen, assuming it's going to only last 5 years (2013-2018).

Dev cycles are too long it would seem, as the powerful hardware is allowing them to be far more ambitious than previously, albeit at the expense of timely releases.

The logical assumption would be that this gen will last longer than 5 years.

No new consoles launched until 2020, is my prediction.

Though I can see MS launching a new one much earlier, which will likely force Sony to move in tandem.
 
Sep 4, 2015
13,402
2
0
The generation will go pass 2018 but I think their next games will be out faster either way. Especially if they are working on sequels.
 

Melchiah

Member
Sep 21, 2006
26,751
48
1,385
45
Helsinki, Finland
www.youtube.com
This is very true. It has always been about power with consoles. "Blast Processing vs. on screen colors", 8-bit vs. 16-bit, etc.

Now all of a sudden the differences do not matter (unless PC is dragged in of course still). SMH.

Gamers gonna game.

Yeah, and the same goes for computers. I still remember the Amiga vs. Atari days. It mattered to the public and the press back then, but now it doesn't because reasons.


And some PS fans didn't care about having the best multiplats as much as they do now. The success of the PS2 alone can back this up considering how well the PS2 did after the Xbox launched (with the gap between Xbox and PS2 being the biggest power gap for any modern gaming gen); The "gameplay/fun over graphics" line was pretty popular on the Playstation forums during the PS2 and PS3 gens.

There are hypocrites all over.

Personally, I buy systems for the games they offer, but better performance in multiplatform titles is a plus. Now the same platform offers both; more games and more performance. Naturally it's better to have both than one or the other. I imagine many PS owners are happy to have a better performing platform for once, and likewise some of the XB owners are unhappy about not having one this time.

The thing is, the multiplatform comparisons became increasingly popular last gen, and I don't recall the press trying to belittle the differences back then, or even during the PS2 era, as some of them did when this generation turned things around.
 
Jul 19, 2015
25,317
0
0
Philadelphia,pa
The generation will go pass 2018 but I think their next games will be out faster though. Especially if they are working on sequels.
Yup the only ones i see not making two of are santa monica.

Suckerpunch:infamous second son,another infamous(pretty confident it is)

Naughty dog: uncharted 4&the last of us 2 OR new ip likr at the end of this gen cycle.

GUERILLA: they're already there with killzone and horizon next year. Heck they might make it to 3.

Evolution: they might be stuck on driveclub awhile.

Etc
 
Jun 21, 2013
7,068
1
435
Virginia, United States
Dreams is quite possible the craziest thing Sony have ever greenlit with a decent sized budget (?).

It truly is, and we're all gonna be so thankful for that later on if most aren't already ;)

sörine;190557194 said:
I'm not sure how true that really is, given Sony's most progressive period for localization (PS1 era) was certainly a lot less desparate than their worst (PSP/PS3 era). We'll see how they swing this gen, but Vita's treatment and early abandonment doesn't make a very great case for desperation yielding localization either. Same for Sega (Saturn) or Nintendo (Gamecube) in dark times. Nintendo would be fine fine riding out Wii U and sunsetting 3DS without bringing a lot of the games they are.

Also, window dressing? I'm going to chalk that up to ignorance on your part but NOA/NOE have put serious commitment not only behind their own offbeat localizations (Xenoblade X, Codename STEAM, Tomodachi Life, Splatoon, etc) but also 3rd party efforts (Bravely Default, Yo-Kai Watch, Bayonetta 2, Inazuma Eleven, etc). They've even put it behind games they didn't even publish it in some cases, like Monster Hunter. It's not just Mario and Zelda Nintendo puts serious backing behind, even if some localizations do draw the short straw in this area. When you localize 20+ Japanese games a year not everything is going to get a big push. Of course when you localize less than 5 Japanese games in a year as well they also don't all get the big push either, as Sony's shown us this year.

The "window dressing" stuff was mostly in relation to games like the new Yoshi, DKC TF, the Kirby game etc. Splendid art directions, great level design, but at the end of the day they're still platformers. Nintendo and platformers aren't exactly an unknown entity, it's the one genre they know best. But that probably plays into the "been there, done that" feeling the larger gaming population feels when it comes to Wii U in particular, and partly why they aren't bothering with it. B/c it's those games they hear about, not Yo-Kai Watch or Inazuma Eleven etc.

I'd question the notion that neither Saturn or Gamecube didn't see interesting results due to their predicaments, tho yes overall they didn't get to the level of Dreamcast or PS3 in that department (from 1st/2nd party efforts). Panzer Dragoon is pretty much the most imaginative rail shooter series in history. Burning Rangers was and still is unlike most other games out there (Fireman on SFC is the closest equivalent). Chibi Robo, Cubivore, and Metroid Prime were fantastic innovations and/or re-imaginings into territory Nintendo isn't traditionally affiliated with. I never said that the products that come from feeling competition and desperation end up commercially successful, just that more often than not those circumstances spur creative output that's riskier than it isn't.

Another example I can give is the PS2, tho in different context. I'd say that was likely Sony at their least creative and risk taking stage; mostly sequels or new IP being established on hot new genres of the time and typical themes guaranteeing them at least some exposure (Getaway, Killzone, God of War etc.). Their creativity w/ PS1 was mainly b/c they had to in order to survive among competition, not to mention needing to prove themselves after being shamed by Nintendo years prior. PS3's output got more experimental later on b/c even tho stuff like Uncharted did decently it wasn't enough to break away from 360's shadow in the West, and they needed to also cater to the Japanese market more and growing indie scene to hopefully do so (which they eventually did).
 

gundamkyoukai

Member
Aug 30, 2009
16,960
123
940
Going back to my comment last night, I just don't see enough time for most of Sony WWS to even pump out 2 AAA games this gen, assuming it's going to only last 5 years (2013-2018).

Dev cycles are too long it would seem, as the powerful hardware is allowing them to be far more ambitious than previously, albeit at the expense of timely releases.

The logical assumption would be that this gen will last longer than 5 years.

No new consoles launched until 2020, is my prediction.

Though I can see MS launching a new one much earlier, which will likely force Sony to move in tandem.

The only people that might not put out 2 games this gen is SSM and PD .
PD might not because GT going to move to the service model .
 

Culex

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
6,355
180
1,500
38
Hoping we hear something from either camp about Christmas sales or it's going to be a long few weeks.
 

sörine

Banned
Sep 1, 2013
7,582
0
0
You said

which is completely untrue. Sony localizes pretty much everything they release in Japan nowadays, even extremely niche stuff that has no hope of selling. The last time they passed on a localization was Demon's Souls and they learned from that mistake.
Well that's not true, since Demon's Souls they also skipped Toro games, Bleach games, Boku no Natsuyumi games, Badman games, Miku Hockey, WKC2/PSP, Oreshika PSP and other titles in Anerica or Europe. But it's not that Nintendo localizes all their own games either, they skip a lot but that's not really the issue. For Sony it's part they don't even produce much Japanese content themselves anymore and also part that they're no longer on the lookout to bring Japanese 3rd party stuff either. Nintendo's sort of doubling down in both those areas though.

It makes some sense why Sony's investment in Japanese development and localization pales today compared to the PS1 or even PS2 era, but at the end of the day it still pales. Nintendo doesn't, in fact they seem more invested in Japanese development and localization than maybe at any point since the early/mid Famicom era. And perhaps to their peril ultimately too.
 

Bgamer90

Banned
Mar 20, 2007
20,961
0
0
I think we'll see the successor to at least one of the current gen consoles (PS4 and/or Xbox One) before 2020 but both consoles will be still be supported at that time.

_________________________

Personally, I buy systems for the games they offer, but better performance in multiplatform titles is a plus. Now the same platform offers both; more games and more performance. Naturally it's better to have both than one or the other. I imagine many PS owners are happy to have a better performing platform for once, and likewise some of the XB owners are unhappy about not having one this time.

I have always just bought whatever console had more games I'm interested in (regardless of overall game quantity or graphical power position) as long as the console is far more powerful than what I had during the previous gen. More power and more games only goes so far if I'm not interested in a good amount of games on the console to begin with.

The thing is, the multiplatform comparisons became increasingly popular last gen, and I don't recall the press trying to belittle the differences back then, or even during the PS2 era, as some of them did when this generation turned things around.

I don't know if I completely agree with this. I had Game Informer during the PS2 gen and they had regular comparisons within their game reviews. Xbox versions of many multiplats were FAR better than PS2 but they wouldn't give those versions the complete nod and bring up "friends" and/or online play (PS2 was the only console to play EA games online for the majority of its gen for example). IGN did the same. I didn't really see that as downplaying -- I simply saw that more as acknowledgement that some people won't find the better looking version as the more ideal version to get. I feel the same now with most current gen comparisons.
 

Primethius

Banned
Jan 20, 2008
17,874
0
0
U.S.
twitter.com
sörine;190561826 said:
Well that's not true, since Demon's Souls they also skipped Toro games, Bleach games, Boku no Natsuyumi games, Badman games, Miku Hockey, WKC2/PSP, Oreshika PSP and other titles in Anerica or Europe. But it's not that Nintendo localizes all their own games either, they skip a lot but that's not really the issue. For Sony it's part they don't even produce much Japanese content themselves anymore and also part that they're no longer on the lookout to bring Japanese 3rd party stuff either. Nintendo's sort of doubling down in both those areas though.

It makes some sense why Sony's investment in Japanese development and localization pales today compared to the PS1 or even PS2 era, but at the end of the day it still pales. Nintendo doesn't, in fact they seem more invested in Japanese development and localization than maybe at any point since the early/mid Famicom era. And perhaps to their peril ultimately too.

For Nintendo, it makes sense to me. Japan's the only place where their console and handheld aren't dead/dying.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
46,833
94,627
1,380
Only reason EA was online for the PS2 and not Xbox, was due to the fact that EA wanted to control their own dedicated servers, and MSFT was not budging on their P2P client service.

It quickly changed when MSFT realized they needed that publisher to support them for the 360 launch, and allowed EA (as well as most publishers), control their own dedicated servers through the P2P Live client.
 

hawk2025

Member
Jan 20, 2013
15,489
0
0
I think we'll see the successor to at least one of the current gen consoles (PS4 and/or Xbox One) before 2020 but both consoles will be still be supported at that time.

_________________________



I have always just bought whatever console had more games I'm interested in (regardless of overall game quantity or graphical power position) as long as the console is far more powerful than what I had during the previous gen. More power and more games only goes so far if I'm not interested in a good amount of games on the console to begin with.



I don't know if I completely agree with this. I had Game Informer during the PS2 gen and they had regular comparisons within their game reviews. Xbox versions of many multiplats were FAR better than PS2 but they wouldn't give those versions the complete nod and bring up "friends" and/or online play (PS2 was the only console to play EA games online for the majority of its gen for example). IGN did the same. I didn't really see that as downplaying -- I simply saw that more as acknowledgement that some people won't find the better looking version as the more ideal version to get. I feel the same now with most current gen comparisons.

There's a significant difference between not having online play altogether and having a debatable advantage on online systems that has no appreciable impact on actual gameplay. Buuut, that's neither here nor there. I don't recall those magazines from 10+ years ago and would find quantifying this comparison nigh-impossible, so don't have much to add.
 

Bgamer90

Banned
Mar 20, 2007
20,961
0
0
There's a significant difference between not having online play altogether and having a debatable advantage on online systems that has no appreciable impact on actual gameplay.

Agree but both cases (now and back then) had "you might just want to play where your friends are" statements for comparisons that were mostly focused on visuals.

Only reason EA was online for the PS2 and not Xbox, was due to the fact that EA wanted to control their own dedicated servers, and MSFT was not budging on their P2P client service.

It quickly changed when MSFT realized they needed that publisher to support them for the 360 launch, and allowed EA (as well as most publishers), control their own dedicated servers through the P2P Live client.

Yep. And the Xbox versions of those EA sports games looked FAR better than PS2 versions (unlike this gen where they mostly look the same on both consoles; heck even last gen with PS3/360 had more differences). I still didn't think it was downplaying, just like I don't think it's downplaying to recommend buying a MP heavy game on a weaker console if it has more players that you know. If all you care about are visuals then the statements/breakdown about what console is better for that is always in these pieces (it's never missing).
 

hawk2025

Member
Jan 20, 2013
15,489
0
0
Agree but both cases simply boiled down to "you might just want to play where your friends are" for comparisons that were mostly focused on visuals.

How so?

If anything, online play lets you play with complete strangers. It's a completely different feature.
 

Kyoufu

Member
Jul 26, 2007
72,201
6
0
London
twitter.com
sörine said:
I have to disagree with that. You don't see Sony taking risks on things like Codename STEAM, DQ remakes, Devil's Third, LBX, etc.

We're talking about the company that localised Yakuza 5 for the fucking PS3.

And is localising Yakuza Zero.

And every Vita game they localised was a risk.

I don't even understand.
 

pixelation

Member
Nov 21, 2014
5,847
1,181
720
Going back to my comment last night, I just don't see enough time for most of Sony WWS to even pump out 2 AAA games this gen, assuming it's going to only last 5 years (2013-2018).

Dev cycles are too long it would seem, as the powerful hardware is allowing them to be far more ambitious than previously, albeit at the expense of timely releases.

The logical assumption would be that this gen will last longer than 5 years.

No new consoles launched until 2020, is my prediction.

Though I can see MS launching a new one much earlier, which will likely force Sony to move in tandem.

My dislike for MS will only grow stronger if they they go ahead and do that, motherfuckers should just ride it out.
 

QaaQer

Member
Jun 13, 2012
11,333
0
0
In what world is something like Until Dawn or Bloodborne not as weird as League of Legends?

I'm confused as to the criteria now. Sales? Critical Reception? Genre acceptance?

Cause League sure as hell wasn't a unique game or a weird game back when it came out. It blew up big, sure. But weird? What.

Not according to the founders of riot. Maybe they are liars?

Those games are mainstream and standardized as all hell.

Now.

Anyway, list wars and bb ad hominems aren't my thing.
 

Jigorath

Banned
Aug 22, 2013
12,903
4
0
twitter.com
sörine;190561826 said:
Well that's not true, since Demon's Souls they also skipped Toro games, Bleach games, Boku no Natsuyumi games, Badman games, Miku Hockey, WKC2/PSP, Oreshika PSP and other titles in Anerica or Europe. But it's not that Nintendo localizes all their own games either, they skip a lot but that's not really the issue. For Sony it's part they don't even produce much Japanese content themselves anymore and also part that they're no longer on the lookout to bring Japanese 3rd party stuff either. Nintendo's sort of doubling down in both those areas though.

It makes some sense why Sony's investment in Japanese development and localization pales today compared to the PS1 or even PS2 era, but at the end of the day it still pales. Nintendo doesn't, in fact they seem more invested in Japanese development and localization than maybe at any point since the early/mid Famicom era. And perhaps to their peril ultimately too.

I checked wikipedia, and the last time Sony published a game in Japan but didn't bring it over was a Bleach game in 2011. That was four years ago. And was brought over by NIS anyways. For the last few years they've been localizing everything. But once again you've glazed over my main point which was calling you out on

sörine;190546292 said:
You don't see Sony taking risks on things like Codename STEAM, DQ remakes, Devil's Third, LBX, etc.
 

Primethius

Banned
Jan 20, 2008
17,874
0
0
U.S.
twitter.com
Not according to the founders of riot. Maybe they are liars?



Now.

Anyway, list wars and bb ad hominems aren't my thing.

Uh... maybe they are? I don't know what they said.

League is a copy of Dota. It lifted so much from Dota, it's ridiculous. You could make an argument for Dota being weird, but League? Hell no.

So many champions in League early on were lifted straight out of Dota, either in abilities or how they played. It's only in the past two years that League has really come onto it's own and not, "spot that ability from Dota."
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Jul 6, 2005
91,410
3
0
32
I don't understand why Devil's Third and Codename STEAM are risks. These are entries in established genres (Devil's Third is in the first or second most popular genre on console from the director of probably the most critically acclaimed action director of all time, Codename STEAM is basically IS iterating on a very successful formula). They're just shit. If the only criteria for a game being a "risk" is that it could not sell well, then basically everything Sony has done on the PS3 and Vita since 2012 except for The Last of Us is a gigantic risk. Sorine, this seems like you've really artificially constructed this argument. Why are DQ remakes bigger risks than Yakuza? There is just as much text and DQ is bigger than Yakuza "in the west," which I'm surprised you haven't mentioned.
 

hawk2025

Member
Jan 20, 2013
15,489
0
0
Not according to the founders of riot. Maybe they are liars?



Now.

Anyway, list wars and bb ad hominems aren't my thing.


lol, you can't just dismiss people that have proven you categorically wrong through clear examples by calling it "list wars".
 

sörine

Banned
Sep 1, 2013
7,582
0
0
I checked wikipedia, and the last time Sony published a game in Japan but didn't bring it over was a Bleach game in 2011. That was four years ago. And was brought over by NIS anyways. For the last few years they've been localizing everything. But once again you've glazed over my main point which was calling you out on
I already listed several for you besides Bleach, and they skipped more Bleach games than just the PS3 title NISA grabbed. Maybe go deeper than glancing at a US wikipedia page next time.

I didn't glaze over your argument either, I addressed it and explained why it was sort of missing the point. Even if Sony did localize everything they release in Japan (which no company does btw) it'd still result in a dramatic descrease in Japanese localizations versus previous years.

I mean, I feel it's sort of crazy to really try and refute this obvious trend when Sony released 2 Japanese games in west this year. Yes two.

I don't understand why Devil's Third and Codename STEAM are risks. These are entries in established genres (Devil's Third is in the first or second most popular genre on console, Codename STEAM is basically IS iterating on a very successful formula). They're just shit. If the only criteria for a game being a "risk" is that it could not sell well, then basically everything Sony has done on the PS3 and Vita since 2012 except for The Last of Us is a gigantic risk. Sorine, this seems like you've really artificially constructed this argument. Why are DQ remakes bigger risks than Yakuza? There is just as much text and DQ is bigger than Yakuza "in the west," which I'm surprised you haven't mentioned.
You really need an explanation why a ridiculed kusoge shooter (that might've shipped hundreds of units in America) and a comicbooky handheld rts/cover shooter hybrid starring Abe Lincoln might be seen as risky? And then imply my only criteria was because they already tanked, after I went ahead a identified efforts like Bravely Default, Tomodachi Life or Splatoon as being in the same sort of category? And then you accuse me of artificially constructing the argument?

I mean, I guess we could compare DQ remakes to Yakuza. They seem to sell in the same ballpark in the west, although only one's getting full retail releases and 1st party publishing here. So what's the bigger risk, publishing a game at retail or not actually publishing it at all?
 

sörine

Banned
Sep 1, 2013
7,582
0
0
This entire debate seems petty as all hell both Nintendo and sony do a good job on the "risk" department. To try and say otherwise is for console war nonsense. Now Microsoft...heh
Even an argument can be made for MS. I mean they're publishing a Platinum bomba after all. :p

So you're doubling down on the "Sony doesn't take risks" argument. Aight.
Well, no. In fact I said the opposite, they have the best 1st party indie curation bar none.

I think some people are getting too hung up the "risky" and overlooking the "Japanese" in my comments. This is really about regional localization, not how risk taking their entire portfolio is. That's what my original point was over, these days things like Japanese rhythm games, offbeat sims and jrpgs aren't so much what we see from Sony but from Nintendo. In the 1990s it was sort of the opposite of that, it's just a funny coincidence.