Support NeoGAF

[Hero of Legend]

Seems kinda pointless to put it on the XB1, but not putting it out on the Switch is a big blunder. This is a game that suits a Nintendo platform.

Agreed. The platforming demographic has always been at its highest on Nintendo systems. The PS4 certainly isn't going to rival that, not while Sony clearly focus on AAA M-rated blockbuster franchises.

It's even weirder they even "got" Crash when they own its successor Jak & Daxter, which as an open-world platformer, would most likely be more compelling to fans of today. Why not just give Jak to Sanzaru who IMO proved themselves with Sly 4? They have full control of that and would never have to worry about that going multiplatform.

 

[wrestleman]

Agreed. The platforming demographic has always been at its highest on Nintendo systems. The PS4 certainly isn't going to rival that, not while Sony clearly focus on AAA M-rated blockbuster franchises.

It's even weirder they even "got" Crash when they own its successor Jak & Daxter, which as an open-world platformer, would most likely be more compelling to fans of today. Why not just give Jak to Sanzaru who IMO proved themselves with Sly 4? They have full control of that and would never have to worry about that going multiplatform.

Because Crash outdid Jak saleswise in every regard, and has a far bigger nostalgic following and demand online pre-announcement. The investment would probably garner Sony more of a return than funneling an entire budget into a Jak 5 and not doing as well.

 

[SNURB]

Agreed. The platforming demographic has always been at its highest on Nintendo systems. The PS4 certainly isn't going to rival that, not while Sony clearly focus on AAA M-rated blockbuster franchises.

It's even weirder they even "got" Crash when they own its successor Jak & Daxter, which as an open-world platformer, would most likely be more compelling to fans of today. Why not just give Jak to Sanzaru who IMO proved themselves with Sly 4? They have full control of that and would never have to worry about that going multiplatform.

Crash was still a top seller (even when ND stopped making the games) whereas the Jak games are a rollercoaster quality-wise who's sales dwindled after each game.

Plus I don't know what you mean by saying that the PS4 can't be as good platforming wise as Nintendo? If the recent Ratchet game is anything to go by, the demographic for the PS4 is there.

 

[Agent X]

Outside of Prototype 2, I don't recall Activision games Being on PS+ or GwG. Activision don't play that game.

Transformers: Devastation was on PS+ just a few months ago.

 

[Hero of Legend]

Crash was still a top seller (even when ND stopped making the games) whereas the Jak games are a rollercoaster quality-wise who's sales dwindled after each game.

Plus I don't know what you mean by saying that the PS4 can't be as good platforming wise as Nintendo? If the recent Ratchet game is anything to go by, the demographic for the PS4 is there.

1. Ratchet may have been the fastest selling in the series when it came out, but how do we know it wasn't just front-loaded?

2. Adding to that, the movie had just came out alongside it.

3. No-one, fans or Sony, really ever talk about it anymore (that I've noticed).

4. Sony, for whatever reason, dropped the price 2 months in, on a game that was already a budget priced. One doesn't do that on a good selling game.

5. Can you name any other examples? If Ratchet is the only one that came to your mind, that doesn't exactly help your case.

If you have legit numbers, or at least any NPD or Chart Track leaks, I'm all ears (eyes?). I'll happily accept being wrong so long as I can see some proof beyond the "fastest selling" bit from the first week/month. But my point still stands (particularly for #5).

Nintendo has always cultivated the platforming market with Mario, DK, Kirby, Yoshi, and close allies like Sonic. Sony on the other hand clearly hasn't aside from rare exceptions. They made their AAA M-rated blockbuster demographic bed and are sleeping in it. That's just the road they chose to follow.

 

[sense]

Agreed. The platforming demographic has always been at its highest on Nintendo systems. The PS4 certainly isn't going to rival that, not while Sony clearly focus on AAA M-rated blockbuster franchises.

It's even weirder they even "got" Crash when they own its successor Jak & Daxter, which as an open-world platformer, would most likely be more compelling to fans of today. Why not just give Jak to Sanzaru who IMO proved themselves with Sly 4? They have full control of that and would never have to worry about that going multiplatform.

Why is it weird? Fans were clamoring for his return for a long time and he was a huge mascot for Sony back in the day and the original Sony exclusives were the best sellers and still continue to sell. We even had Andrew house come out a couple of years and acknowledge the fan demand and hinted that the door is open.

Can you dispute the fact that this is only happening because Sony went to activision and worked out a deal and gave them the assets for the original classics? If Sony were not behind this, would activision be able to make a big deal out of his return? They wouldn't have even made a new crash and he would have stayed buried for all we know.

With Sony behind this, I doubt it is coming to switch. PC is most likely what it will come to next if it turns out to be not exclusive.

 

[wrestleman]

If you have legit numbers, or at least any NPD or Chart Track leaks, I'm all ears (eyes?)

Why is speculation fine to make your point but not to make his? Not saying I agree with either of you in particular... but it's not like you have any more hard, factual numbers than he does.

 

[SNURB]

Can you dispute the fact that this is only happening because Sony went to activision and worked out a deal and gave them the assets for the original classics? If Sony were not behind this, would activision be able to make a big deal out of his return? They wouldn't have even made a new crash and he would have stayed buried for all we know.

This essentially.

Activision wouldn't even have dared to touch the IP if it weren't for Sony to convince the company to come on board. They supplied the studio with assets and are funding part of this game.

 

[Hero of Legend]

You're right that Sony likely did influence Activision, though I'm not sure we ever heard they're funding it, since wouldn't that make it exclusive and then we'd know it was?

One example I can give to a colorful game doing far better on Switch than on PS4 is Puyo Puyo Tetris. The split between the two according to a Chart-Track leak is 74/26 in favor of Switch. Not a platformer, but this is on a brand new system with only around a million or so owner in EU (guessing) vs PS4 which has a userbase likely 10x as many in EU or whatever. And it's more expensive on Switch.

 

[wrestleman]

You're right that Sony likely did influence Activision, though I'm not sure we ever heard they're funding it, since wouldn't that make it exclusive and then we'd know it was?

We haven't heard that they've funded it but we have heard the game director say "Sony came to Activision who came to us" and we've also heard one of the producers say in an interview that Sony is a "decision maker" when it comes to Crash (in reference to future Crash games being developed by VV), and a VV employee said on a personal stream (which he made clear had been cleared through corporate) that Sony has been very hands on with all things Crash, from Skylanders up to the main games, supplying art, assets, etc as needed for VV -- these probably aren't verbatim quotes because it's been a couple months since I've seen these videos but I'm sure you get the point of them.

The gist being that Sony seems to be the reason this is even happening and seems to be a big influence in Crash in general at this stage. Nobody can say if they funded the games or if it's truly exclusive, but if it was I don't think anybody can come out and be shocked by it at this point.

 

[sense]

You're right that Sony likely did influence Activision, though I'm not sure we ever heard they're funding it, since wouldn't that make it exclusive and then we'd know it was?

One example I can give to a colorful game doing far better on Switch than on PS4 is Puyo Puyo Tetris. The split between the two according to a Chart-Track leak is 74/26 in favor of Switch. Not a platformer, but this is on a brand new system with only around a million or so owner in EU (guessing) vs PS4 which has a userbase likely 10x as many in EU or whatever. And it's more expensive on Switch.

That is very poor example and people pick up games to justify a platform at launch, that is like knack selling great on PS4 and beating Mario. U.K. Charts are negligible in that sales are in the thousands range for the most part plus It is a new platform and people are excited to buy games for it especially something like Tetris which suits the portability factor. Not only did the PS4 have many exclusives in this period, there were also big third party games released so I don't know how many people were interested in picking up a Tetris game at retail. Personally I was hoping a digital version was available because I want to be able to play a quick game whenever I feel like it.

 

[Synth]

true, but you'ed see the glaring differences between the two hardware. such as a pro version having better lighting, no aliasing, more vibrant colors.

You'd see those differences with any game that hits both regardless (for example Sonic Forces). Hell, you see more than that between games each has exclusively.

 

[Liliana Eileen]

This essentially.

Activision wouldn't even have dared to touch the IP if it weren't for Sony to convince the company to come on board. They supplied the studio with assets and are funding part of this game.

This is inherently false and sounds like wishful thinking. Sony is not funding Crash at all.

 

[JaseC]

We haven't heard that they've funded it but we have heard the game director say "Sony came to Activision who came to us" and we've also heard one of the producers say in an interview that Sony is a "decision maker" when it comes to Crash (in reference to future Crash games being developed by VV), and a VV employee said on a personal stream (which he made clear had been cleared through corporate) that Sony has been very hands on with all things Crash, from Skylanders up to the main games, supplying art, assets, etc as needed for VV -- these probably aren't verbatim quotes because it's been a couple months since I've seen these videos but I'm sure you get the point of them.

The gist being that Sony seems to be the reason this is even happening and seems to be a big influence in Crash in general at this stage. Nobody can say if they funded the games or if it's truly exclusive, but if it was I don't think anybody can come out and be shocked by it at this point.

You seem to be suggesting this yourself, but just so there's no misunderstanding, "decision maker" doesn't refer to Sony having any sort of final say but rather some level of creative input -- an extended courtesy. It owns neither the IP nor any of the associated characters and therefore has no executive input on the direction of the franchise. That's entirely Acti's court and it's not obligated to involve Sony in any sort of decision making.

 

[wrestleman]

You seem to be suggesting this yourself, but just so there's no misunderstanding, "decision maker" doesn't refer to Sony having any sort of final say but rather some level of creative input -- an extended courtesy. It owns neither the IP nor any of the associated characters and therefore has no executive input on the direction of the franchise. That's entirely Acti's court and it's not obligated to involve Sony in any sort of decision making.

The phrasing of her sentence implied that Sony would be a catalyst in terms of games getting made; i.e. if Sony wanted Activision to make a specific thing and came to them, it could happen the same way the Trilogy did (for example, CTR) -- but as far as Sony's actual possible control, you're right on the money as to what I was suggesting.

 

[JaseC]

The phrasing of her sentence implied that Sony would be a catalyst in terms of games getting made; i.e. if Sony wanted Activision to make a specific thing and came to them, it could happen the same way the Trilogy did (for example, CTR) -- but as far as Sony's actual possible control, you're right on the money as to what I was suggesting.

Ah, so she misspoke and simply meant that Acti would be receptive to proposals.

 

[mas8705]

Do you think Activision would ruin what little partnership their have left at MS for Sony?

Considering that Call of Duty used to do their big things during the Microsoft conference only for it to have been done on the Sony conference instead for the last two years, I'd say that bridge as already been set on fire. Especially considering that when it comes to "exclusives" bonuses considering that Destiny got on the PS4 than on the Xbox One.

I know that Crash has gone Multi-platform after a while, but some still connect Crash with the Playstation. Especially considering that we are talking about the first three Crash games that were on the playstation 1, it does feel weird to think of it going on other platforms. Not that it is a bad thing if we do see it go to PC, Xbox One or even the Nintendo Switch.

 

[DriftingSpirit]

1. Ratchet may have been the fastest selling in the series when it came out, but how do we know it wasn't just front-loaded?

2. Adding to that, the movie had just came out alongside it.

3. No-one, fans or Sony, really ever talk about it anymore (that I've noticed).

4. Sony, for whatever reason, dropped the price 2 months in, on a game that was already a budget priced. One doesn't do that on a good selling game.

5. Can you name any other examples? If Ratchet is the only one that came to your mind, that doesn't exactly help your case.

If you have legit numbers, or at least any NPD or Chart Track leaks, I'm all ears (eyes?). I'll happily accept being wrong so long as I can see some proof beyond the "fastest selling" bit from the first week/month. But my point still stands (particularly for #5).

Nintendo has always cultivated the platforming market with Mario, DK, Kirby, Yoshi, and close allies like Sonic. Sony on the other hand clearly hasn't aside from rare exceptions. They made their AAA M-rated blockbuster demographic bed and are sleeping in it. That's just the road they chose to follow.

No.

 

[wrestleman]

Ah, so she misspoke and simply meant that Acti would be receptive to proposals.

I wish I could find the actual video because that's not quite the intent it seemed to have, but I do want to clarify I'm not saying that Sony has any sort of ownership or veto power.

 

[Hero of Legend]

No.

That's... not much of an answer.

 

[Nev]

Alledgedly final cover art:

Still eh but miles better than the other abomination.

Anyways, with Activision involved, the game will come to every single platform that can run it sooner or later. If Sony was smart they should've gone for full IP purchase or nothing, but because they're not smart at all they lost their own Mario a second time around.

"We learned from our lesson with Demon's Souls" lmao sure. Seven years later you give up the only good Crash Bandicoot games to every other publisher/company.

You don't go to Activision and say "You know? We think a remake of the actual Crash Bandicoot games we exclusively own the rights of will sell millions and will make the name bankable for your greedy ass overlords again!", you tell them "Can we have this dead name you're sitting on? I mean it's not like it's going to give you any money anyways" and then you remake the three games and CTR before making a new game.

It's going to be fun seeing Yoshida's reaction when this thing and the CTR remake sell like crazy and Activision kills it again with garbage yearly titles for 8 simultaneous platforms.

It's a good thing for me though since I prefer to play it on Steam, just pointing out how incredibly stupid and oblivious Sony can be. Enjoy losing your mascot again. They've always been awful at managing those, unlike Nintendo.

 

[Spyder_Monkey]

I'm going to go with it's not coming to Xbox.

 

[Mosse]

Alledgedly final cover art:


Still eh but miles better than the other abomination.

Anyways, with Activision involved, the game will come to every single platform that can run it sooner or later. If Sony was smart they should've gone for full IP purchase or nothing, but because they're not smart at all they lost their own Mario a second time around.

"We learned from our lesson with Demon's Souls" lmao sure. Seven years later you give up the only good Crash Bandicoot games to every other publisher/company.

You don't go to Activision and say "You know? We think a remake of the actual Crash Bandicoot games we exclusively own the rights of will sell millions and will make the name bankable for your greedy ass overlords again!", you tell them "Can we have this dead name you're sitting on? I mean it's not like it's going to give you any money anyways" and then you remake the three games and CTR before making a new game.

It's going to be fun seeing Yoshida's reaction when this thing and the CTR remake sell like crazy and Activision kills it again with garbage yearly titles for 8 simultaneous platforms.

It's a good thing for me though since I prefer to play it on Steam, just pointing out how incredibly stupid and oblivious Sony can be. Enjoy losing your mascot again. They've always been awful at managing those, unlike Nintendo.

How do you know they didn't try and Activision just didn't want to sell? It's not like they could just walk into Activision HQ with a bag of money and run of with the IP without Activision having a say.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Alledgedly final cover art:


Still eh but miles better than the other abomination.

Anyways, with Activision involved, the game will come to every single platform that can run it sooner or later. If Sony was smart they should've gone for full IP purchase or nothing, but because they're not smart at all they lost their own Mario a second time around.

"We learned from our lesson with Demon's Souls" lmao sure. Seven years later you give up the only good Crash Bandicoot games to every other publisher/company.

You don't go to Activision and say "You know? We think a remake of the actual Crash Bandicoot games we exclusively own the rights of will sell millions and will make the name bankable for your greedy ass overlords again!", you tell them "Can we have this dead name you're sitting on? I mean it's not like it's going to give you any money anyways" and then you remake the three games and CTR before making a new game.

It's going to be fun seeing Yoshida's reaction when this thing and the CTR remake sell like crazy and Activision kills it again with garbage yearly titles for 8 simultaneous platforms.

It's a good thing for me though since I prefer to play it on Steam, just pointing out how incredibly stupid and oblivious Sony can be. Enjoy losing your mascot again. They've always been awful at managing those, unlike Nintendo.

Holy conjecture, Batman!

 

[Jigorath]

3. No-one, fans or Sony, really ever talk about it anymore (that I've noticed).

I recommend Ratchet in those PS4 recommendation threads all the time.

Are you calling me no-one?

Cause that hurts man.

 

[Nev]

How do you know they didn't try and Activision just didn't want to sell? It's not like they could just walk into Activision HQ with a bag of money and run of with the IP without Activision having a say.

they should've gone for full IP purchase or nothing

Holy conjecture, Batman!

Mark my words tho. Especially the part about Activision killing it again with trash releases and careless treatment of the IP.

 

[DriftingSpirit]

That's... not much of an answer.

Here you go.

1. Ratchet may have been the fastest selling in the series when it came out, but how do we know it wasn't just front-loaded?

We don't know but with no evidence to suggest that is the case, it becomes a moot point.

2. Adding to that, the movie had just came out alongside it.

Okay.

3. No-one, fans or Sony, really ever talk about it anymore (that I've noticed).

No one is talking about UC4 now either. It must have have been frontloaded and sold poorly.

This is a very poor argument. Obviously, it isn't going to be talked about as much a year later.

4. Sony, for whatever reason, dropped the price 2 months in, on a game that was already a budget priced. One doesn't do that on a good selling game.

On that same list is MLB which consistently sells well.

I get what you mean but I don't think that is a perfect gauge.

5. Can you name any other examples? If Ratchet is the only one that came to your mind, that doesn't exactly help your case.

If you have legit numbers, or at least any NPD or Chart Track leaks, I'm all ears (eyes?). I'll happily accept being wrong so long as I can see some proof beyond the "fastest selling" bit from the first week/month. But my point still stands (particularly for #5).

You can't disregard that. That data is what we know and it suggests the opposite of what you're suggesting. Without any info supporting your claim, it is baseless and pointless.

I recommend Ratchet in those PS4 recommendation threads all the time.

Are you calling me no-one?

Cause that hurts man.

lol

 

[Mosse]

Mark my words tho. Especially the part about Activision killing it again with trash releases and careless treatment of the IP.

Why should Activision sell the rights to Sony? Neither Sony or Activision would have touched the IP if they didn't see a demand for it. They are probably hoping these remakes will kickstart the franschise, and if they succeed Activision will definitively not want to be in a situation where they sold an IP that could have made them a lot more money then they would have got from selling it. The only reason I can see them selling is if the remakes bomb hard.

So Activision selling the IP to Sony was probably of the table.

 

[Hero of Legend]

I recommend Ratchet in those PS4 recommendation threads all the time.

Are you calling me no-one?

Cause that hurts man.

That was just a figure of speech. Just a way of saying that it's quiet for a game that supposedly sold as well as that "fastest" bit would make it look.

And Uncharted 4 does get spoken of still.

Anyway, whole point is any sort of argument of PS4 being even as strong of a market for platformers as a Nintendo system has little evidence to support it. Meaning, Crash could very well sell more on Switch because it's a platformer.

Could Crash do well on PS4? Maybe, but I'd credit that to nostalgia for folks who were fans of him during the PS1 era. Sonic doesn't have that and does far better on Nintendo systems than any other. All Stars Racing Transformed sold more on Wii U than on PS3 and 360 combined, same for Rayman Legends (both at least in the US). Note you'll see the PS2 Sonic games did a little bit more than the GC ones. Note the VAST install base difference (6:1?), that and those versions were on the market for years longer. I remember seeing more copies of those than the GC games at around 2008-2010.

That's really it. Just never understood the idea of Crash can sell more on PS4 than Switch.

 

[Off-Kilter]

Alledgedly final cover art:


Still eh but miles better than the other abomination.

Anyways, with Activision involved, the game will come to every single platform that can run it sooner or later. If Sony was smart they should've gone for full IP purchase or nothing, but because they're not smart at all they lost their own Mario a second time around.

"We learned from our lesson with Demon's Souls" lmao sure. Seven years later you give up the only good Crash Bandicoot games to every other publisher/company.

You don't go to Activision and say "You know? We think a remake of the actual Crash Bandicoot games we exclusively own the rights of will sell millions and will make the name bankable for your greedy ass overlords again!", you tell them "Can we have this dead name you're sitting on? I mean it's not like it's going to give you any money anyways" and then you remake the three games and CTR before making a new game.

It's going to be fun seeing Yoshida's reaction when this thing and the CTR remake sell like crazy and Activision kills it again with garbage yearly titles for 8 simultaneous platforms.

It's a good thing for me though since I prefer to play it on Steam, just pointing out how incredibly stupid and oblivious Sony can be. Enjoy losing your mascot again. They've always been awful at managing those, unlike Nintendo.

What a ridiculous post. Sony has no reason to shell out the extra money for full exclusivity.

1) PS4 is the market leader, quite comfortably in fact.
2) The IP has a strong PlayStation affiliation when it comes to mindshare, even if Sony doesn't own it.
3) 1 year is a long fucking time.
4) The game isn't exactly going to light the charts on fire, no matter which platforms it's on, and this is coming from someone really looking forward to it.

But no, Sony is stupid because it needs it's 20 year old, totally irrelevant mascot back, or something. I'm sure nobody at PlayStation makes these kinds of decisions without weighing them.

 

[SNURB]

That was just a figure of speech. Just a way of saying that it's quiet for a game that supposedly sold as well as that "fastest" bit would make it look.

And Uncharted 4 does get spoken of still.

Anyway, whole point is any sort of argument of PS4 being even as strong of a market for platformers as a Nintendo system has little evidence to support it. Meaning, Crash could very well sell more on Switch because it's a platformer.

Could Crash do well on PS4? Maybe, but I'd credit that to nostalgia for folks who were fans of him during the PS1 era. Sonic doesn't have that and does far better on Nintendo systems than any other. All Stars Racing Transformed sold more on Wii U than on PS3 and 360 combined, same for Rayman Legends (both at least in the US). Note you'll see the PS2 Sonic games did a little bit more than the GC ones. Note the VAST install base difference (6:1?), that and those versions were on the market for years longer. I remember seeing more copies of those than the GC games at around 2008-2010.

That's really it. Just never understood the idea of Crash can sell more on PS4 than Switch.

I'm sensing a helluva lot of bias in this post.

 

[PeregrinSe7en]

I'm sensing a helluva lot of bias in this post.

pure lunacy if you ask me.

but port begging nonetheless

 

[c0de]

I'm going to go with it's not coming to Xbox.

Cash for Crash? That would be really bad if true but people won't buy the game on a different platform anyway, right?

 

[B33]

Every thread about the exclusivity of the Crash Bandicoot remastered trilogy turns out the same.

 

[Marmaladefire]

.

This is a really convoluted way to port beg. I don't know why this being an exclusive is such a particular affront to some people. It wouldn't be the first third party exclusive, or console exclusive Sony has gotten. This game was built on their code, and is being marketed on hype and nostalgia from games they made. I wouldn't be upset to see this on Switch, but if it isn't.. I get it. It makes enough sense. I don't know why every conversation about this game has to devolve into lighting critique and port begging.

 

[Spyder_Monkey]

Cash for Crash? That would be really bad if true but people won't buy the game on a different platform anyway, right?

I don't think anybody who wants PS1-era nostalgia properties owns an Xbox One.

 

[c0de]

I don't think anybody who wants PS1-era nostalgia properties owns an Xbox One.

But people who only own am Xbox One and perhaps always went for Xbox shouldn't get the chance to play the game besides buying a console for that game because it is a paid exclusive? Hmm...

 

[Hero of Legend]

This is a really convoluted way to port beg. I don't know why this being an exclusive is such a particular affront to some people. It wouldn't be the first third party exclusive, or console exclusive Sony has gotten. This game was built on their code, and is being marketed on hype and nostalgia from games they made. I wouldn't be upset to see this on Switch, but if it isn't.. I get it. It makes enough sense. I don't know why every conversation about this game has to devolve into lighting critique and port begging.

But it's not. The game is built from the ground-up I recall folks saying and me possible reading. Also, Vicarious already used Naughty Dog's assets for their GBA games. I remember reading that they used assets straight from the HDDs that ND used (which were surely owned by Universal Interactive).

The evidence is in the cutscenes:

I did find this from an IGN interview for The Huge Adventure/XS when looking for the source of the above:

Karthik: Some of the Crash 3 assets were re-purposed for the game. All the graphics and animation for Crash GBA was created in Maya. Some of the original animation and textures was used as a basis for the GBA game. It really helped in matching the style of the original series. But a tremendous amount of new assets were created along with a few new characters to join the Crash family of baddies...

Now if you're referring to the inner code of the PS1 itself, sure, Sony likely owns that, likely why the games were always exclusive (that or because they published them). But the assets seemingly were free for Vicarious to use elsewhere.

Anyway, if it gets ported, it gets ported. If not, then it doesn't. Okay? Didn't mean to upset anyone, I sure hope I didn't, I apologize if I did.

 

[Spyder_Monkey]

But people who only own am Xbox One and perhaps always went for Xbox shouldn't get the chance to play the game besides buying a console for that game because it is a paid exclusive? Hmm...

That's not how it works but ok.

 

[AHA-Lambda]

I don't think anybody who wants PS1-era nostalgia properties owns an Xbox One.

Yeah think we need to see some actual proof of that :/

 

[Spyder_Monkey]

Yeah think we need to see some actual proof of that :/

Common sense?

 

[phantasmic_glaive]

1. Ratchet may have been the fastest selling in the series when it came out, but how do we know it wasn't just front-loaded?

2. Adding to that, the movie had just came out alongside it.

3. No-one, fans or Sony, really ever talk about it anymore (that I've noticed).

4. Sony, for whatever reason, dropped the price 2 months in, on a game that was already a budget priced. One doesn't do that on a good selling game.

5. Can you name any other examples? If Ratchet is the only one that came to your mind, that doesn't exactly help your case.

If you have legit numbers, or at least any NPD or Chart Track leaks, I'm all ears (eyes?). I'll happily accept being wrong so long as I can see some proof beyond the "fastest selling" bit from the first week/month. But my point still stands (particularly for #5).

Nintendo has always cultivated the platforming market with Mario, DK, Kirby, Yoshi, and close allies like Sonic. Sony on the other hand clearly hasn't aside from rare exceptions. They made their AAA M-rated blockbuster demographic bed and are sleeping in it. That's just the road they chose to follow.

The proof is in the pudding.. you don't need numbers, especially for random games to prove a moot point.
Almost everything comes out on PS4, first or later. That's where the sales potential is and where it'll stay, PS4 and PC.

You talk about Ratchet being front loaded and think these Switch games aren't, lol? You know you're starved for games when Disgaea(is that how you spell it?) is on par to sell 100k units on launch in the west.

That's neither here nor there.. but all types of games sell on PS platforms. There's no reason to think they don't man.. I remember guacamelee doing great, shante, axiom verge, etc.

If it's gonna multi platform (Crash) then it should be on all systems including Xbox.

Also, Switch fans are a stingy bunch.

 

[Hero of Legend]

The proof is in the pudding.. you don't need numbers, especially for random games to prove a moot point.
Almost everything comes out on PS4, first or later. That's where the sales potential is and where it'll stay, PS4 and PC.

You talk about Ratchet being front loaded and think these Switch games aren't, lol? You know you're starved for games when Disgaea(is that how you spell it?) is on par to sell 100k units on launch in the west.

That's neither here nor there.. but all types of games sell on PS platforms. There's no reason to think they don't man.. I remember guacamelee doing great, shante, axiom verge, etc.

If it's gonna multi platform (Crash) then it should be on all systems including Xbox.

Also, Switch fans are a stingy bunch.

Oh I never said that I'm against it going to XBO, I mean all multiplat entries were on XB also.

You got a point with the indie mentions. I think I remember some doing fairly well.

 

[c0de]

That's not how it works but ok.

I get that this is not how it works for you. But you are implying that there is no audience for the game at all on other platforms which is hardly “common sense“.

 

[opricnik]

I don't think anybody who wants PS1-era nostalgia properties owns an Xbox One.

Man stop with these bullshit assumptions

really . just stop.

 

[Rellik]

Man stop with these bullshit assumptions

really . just stop.

Almost as bad as the "Xbox owners don't want Japanese games"

 

[TheUnsunghero26]

I don't think anybody who wants PS1-era nostalgia properties owns an Xbox One.

Common sense?

I realize you're just trolling, but it's pretty silly to think that people couldn't have switched consoles in the last 20 years.

If it is timed exclusive, there would be almost no reason for Activision to not put it out on everything. Besides, it's not like the PS4 and Xbox One architecture is that different that it would be a hassle to port.

I do think it is strange that the exclusivity is unclear on this game, Sony is usually good about being upfront about that sort of thing.

 

[SarusGray]

These threads bring out the worse in people sometimes. The game is coming out soon so we'll finally know once its out what happens. Publishers/Developers not being clear is a nuisance to gamers though. That practice really needs to change. Transparency is something I feel we should be clamoring for.

 

[The God]

This is an L for Sony if they couldn't get full exclusivity

 

[JaseC]

This is an L for Sony if they couldn't get full exclusivity

At the very least, that would have been very, very expensive. Acti isn't a publisher that gives up full control over its products, and for good reason -- it's acutely aware that a bigger audience is more valuable than a bag of cash.