Sony was being too ambitious with the non-gaming applications of Home and delayed the project to focus on gaming, SCEE president David Reeves has told CVG.
In a brief interview at the recent PlayStation Day event in London, Reeves admitted that Sony wants to make sure the gaming parts of the service, like trophies and Home-to-game launching, are ready before it goes public.
"It is definitely coming out in autumn," assured Reeves. "Whether that's October or November, I don't precisely know, but it is an open beta."
"We've realised that maybe we were too ambitious with the non-gaming applications within Home, getting sponsors and stuff like that," he went on to confess.
"In that sense we were deserting gamers. So, we're concentrating on the gaming by launching games in Home, and attracting people who are into gaming in first - instead of the Nike people, or Adidas people who are into fashion and not necessarily into gaming."
Reeves also spoke of the diminishing importance of platform exclusives from third parties, as first-party games become more prominent. "We did Buzz, we're doing LittleBigPlanet, Killzone, and there are obviously others that we're developing. We're becoming less dependent on third parties."
But, he added, Sony will seize exclusivity opportunities for games that attract new customers.
"It's got to be something that catches our eye and we think will bring new consumers into the industry. We can't keep recycling consumers from one iteration of PlayStation or Wii to another. We've got to gather up new people as we go through the years," he said.
The penny finally drops. This is one of the main reasons I've held off getting a PS3, I still feel that im waiting for that system seller to drop (it maybe MGS).
If they now understand that gamers want game related products and services then that can only be a good thing. Shame its taken so long to hit home though.
I agree with him about new games; I don't just want the same games with every generation - there is still a lack of really imagination in this generation.
I think it says it all when the biggest games of this generation generally end will a number i.e. call of duty 4, gta4, megs4, gt 5, halo 3 - of course there are some exceptions but not enough
No mention of the trophy system at all then? That seems to have all but dropped off the Home radar. Maybe PS3 was never meant to have an achievements system. Sigh.
No mention of the trophy system at all then? That seems to have all but dropped off the Home radar. Maybe PS3 was never meant to have an achievements system. Sigh.
mentioned a lot here - http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2008/05/08/home-game-spaces-being-shown-off-later-this-month/
also says achievements will be added to the xmb as wellundefined
No mention of the trophy system at all then? That seems to have all but dropped off the Home radar. Maybe PS3 was never meant to have an achievements system. Sigh.
The fact it didnt launch with it should have made that obvious, surely? These 'trophies' or whatever they'll be called won't be comparable to the 360's achievements because they arent a system-wide standard.
They work so well on the 360 because everything uses them, everyone has them and everything is linked together seamlessly.
Really hope they ditch any form of achievement system, at least if it's comparable to the 360's and Steam's. Or at least make it optional so I can just opt out of the whole thing. I didn't really appreciate Valve going this way since The Orange Box.. I considered them one of the developers that were slighty more mature, but then I got Episode 2, sure enough I was apparently rated "Teh Suck" as at that point I hadn't collected enough random garbage achievements that pop up during play just to make things a little more annoying. FFS. My brother-in-law apparently plays on Live with friends who take turns to shoot each other to collect all these worthless virtual gold stars.. Yeah, count me out, thanks, I hope Sony reconsiders this ridiculous idea.
"So, we're concentrating on the gaming by launching games in Home, and attracting people who are into gaming in first - instead of the Nike people, or Adidas people who are into fashion and not necessarily into gaming."
I despair, I really do - how can it come as any sort of revelation that you should focus on gaming features for your big expensive GAMES console???
Are the Nike people, or the Adidas people, who are into fashion and not necessarily into gaming, going to go out and drop Ł300 on a games console so they can just ponce about in a virtual environment wearing virtual Nike or Adidas?
Why the f**k would anyone 'into Nike or Adidas or fashion' want to be seen dicking about in geek central like Home? I thought these people had lives and were out doing drugs and shagging...
Sony are way too caught up in this lifestyle bulls**t. They should have made it 'Arcade' instead, where you can and meet people playing videogames, or play head-to-head on retro coin-ops and stuff.
The day I find myself talking in txt-spk with dancing Abercrombie & Fitch-clad avatars is the day I give up gaming for good.
Really hope they ditch any form of achievement system, at least if it's comparable to the 360s and Steams. Or at least make it optional so I can just opt out of the whole thing. I didn't really appreciate Valve going this way since The Orange Box.. I considered them one of the developers that were slighty more mature, but then I got Episode 2, sure enough I was apparently rated "Teh Suck" as at that point I hadn't collected enough random garbage achievements that pop up during play just to make things a little more annoying. FFS. My brother-in-law apparently plays on Live with friends who take turns to shoot each other to collect all these worthless virtual gold stars.. Yeah, count me out, thanks, I hope Sony reconsiders this ridiculous idea.
You're brother in law and his friends sound like the kind of cretins the majority of live users do their best to avoid! Its not all about collecting items or shooting so many targets ect to get achievements, its nice to be rewarded when you complete a level or a game. This is one reason I buy multiplatform games on 360 and not PS3, that and XBL is far superior to PSN
Really hope they ditch any form of achievement system, at least if it's comparable to the 360's and Steam's. Or at least make it optional so I can just opt out of the whole thing. I didn't really appreciate Valve going this way since The Orange Box.. I considered them one of the developers that were slighty more mature, but then I got Episode 2, sure enough I was apparently rated "Teh Suck" as at that point I hadn't collected enough random garbage achievements that pop up during play just to make things a little more annoying. FFS. My brother-in-law apparently plays on Live with friends who take turns to shoot each other to collect all these worthless virtual gold stars.. Yeah, count me out, thanks, I hope Sony reconsiders this ridiculous idea.
I couldnt agree more. I have zero interest in collecting all the flags in Assassins creed or getting 5 head shots in a row in some shooter. I dont understand the people that chase this pointless guff and actually buy games based on whether they have achievements. Its longevity in the worst sense, are you enjoying chasing this stuff? Does it give you pleasure? I (oddly) think some people do feel rewarded.
I remember the parcels in Vice City. They had a purpose, every so often you got extra equipment that helped you. Unless theres a point (ala TF2) I find it beyond pointless and time wasting
The problem lies in announcing things long before they will ever see the light of day - and Sony are particularly 'skilled' at this.
Home and Little Big Planet have been on the horizon for over a year now with no firm release dates for either in sight. Just lots of promises, non-announcements and shiny trailers. It's very frustrating. Take a leaf out of Apple's book and announce things on the day (or at least a month or two before) they actually launch and THEN you'll capitalise on the excitement and the 'must-have' buzz. As it stands now, I'm far less interested in Home and LBP than when they were announced.
And I'm sorry, October/November (most likely December if we're lucky) is Winter, not Autumn.
The problem lies in announcing things long before they will ever see the light of day - and Sony are particularly 'skilled' at this.
Home and Little Big Planet have been on the horizon for over a year now with no firm release dates for either in sight. Just lots of promises, non-announcements and shiny trailers. It's very frustrating. Take a leaf out of Apple's book and announce things on the day (or at least a month or two before) they actually launch and THEN you'll capitalise on the excitement and the 'must-have' buzz. As it stands now, I'm far less interested in Home and LBP than when they were announced.
And I'm sorry, October/November (most likely December if we're lucky) is Winter, not Autumn.
That's what you call a "paper launch", it's done to divert interest from the competitions product. Home, Killzone2, LBP and GT5 are all examples, all designed to make you buy a PS3 instead of a 360.
Maybe I'm just missing the point, but do people really give a toss about this at all. Social networking blah, blah, blah. Use Facebook etc, it's going to be way easier to use.
Granted I'm not a PS3 owner (Wii and new 360 owner), but the whole social element of the wii is all about games and fun. Not some ridiculous virtual world where gamers can get even more detached from the reality! Just use the internet for this, it's much more versatile and you'll have the WHOLE world, not just fellow PS3 users.
And the same goes with achievments on xbox live. Some idiot selecting pistols on GTA4 death matches in order to get experience points for X amounts of head shots etc etc. Wow, congratulations; you've wasted an immense amount of time doing pointless crap. If you want to be obsessive, go collect something with actual material value like records (yay!!) or stamps for God's sake.
For the record, people can do what they want but when they start inflicting it on my multiplayer fun, they'd better have a bloody good reason for it!
Oh and you can't really say nintendo is recycling one iteration of wii to another, at least Nintendo did something genuinely innovative with the Wii (and DS), I'm yet to see this kind of forwards thinking from MS or Sony and Home certainly isn't it.
Like many many things with the PS3, it should have been standard and intergrated from the start not years after launch!! It would of been better to delay the release of the PS3 and get things right from the start!. Sony may state it has increased its market share vs Microsoft but how many people just use there PS3 as a Blu-Ray player!!!! I know I do, and there are very limited games that I'm buy on the PS3 over the 360!!
Really hope they ditch any form of achievement system, at least if it's comparable to the 360s and Steams. Or at least make it optional so I can just opt out of the whole thing. I didn't really appreciate Valve going this way since The Orange Box.. I considered them one of the developers that were slighty more mature, but then I got Episode 2, sure enough I was apparently rated "Teh Suck" as at that point I hadn't collected enough random garbage achievements that pop up during play just to make things a little more annoying. FFS. My brother-in-law apparently plays on Live with friends who take turns to shoot each other to collect all these worthless virtual gold stars.. Yeah, count me out, thanks, I hope Sony reconsiders this ridiculous idea.
You're brother in law and his friends sound like the kind of cretins the majority of live users do their best to avoid! Its not all about collecting items or shooting so many targets ect to get achievements, its nice to be rewarded when you complete a level or a game. This is one reason I buy multiplatform games on 360 and not PS3, that and XBL is far superior to PSN
Funny. I buy most multiplatform games on my PS3 to avoid the achievements. Please don't say I'm going to have to endure those annoying pop ups on my PS3 games as well! At least give me some way to disable the damn things first.
The problem lies in announcing things long before they will ever see the light of day - and Sony are particularly 'skilled' at this.
Home and Little Big Planet have been on the horizon for over a year now with no firm release dates for either in sight. Just lots of promises, non-announcements and shiny trailers. It's very frustrating. Take a leaf out of Apple's book and announce things on the day (or at least a month or two before) they actually launch and THEN you'll capitalise on the excitement and the 'must-have' buzz. As it stands now, I'm far less interested in Home and LBP than when they were announced.
And I'm sorry, October/November (most likely December if we're lucky) is Winter, not Autumn.
Well it seemed to work for them on the PS2 but the internet has given people instant access to BS that was said years ago. People are FINALLY figuring Sony out, well not everyone. They need to get some games out and just not even mention Killzone 2 ever again until it's gone gold. I look forward to the "2009 is going to be Sonys year!" comments in the coming months.
Really hope they ditch any form of achievement system, at least if it's comparable to the 360s and Steams. Or at least make it optional so I can just opt out of the whole thing. I didn't really appreciate Valve going this way since The Orange Box.. I considered them one of the developers that were slighty more mature, but then I got Episode 2, sure enough I was apparently rated "Teh Suck" as at that point I hadn't collected enough random garbage achievements that pop up during play just to make things a little more annoying. FFS. My brother-in-law apparently plays on Live with friends who take turns to shoot each other to collect all these worthless virtual gold stars.. Yeah, count me out, thanks, I hope Sony reconsiders this ridiculous idea.
You're brother in law and his friends sound like the kind of cretins the majority of live users do their best to avoid! Its not all about collecting items or shooting so many targets ect to get achievements, its nice to be rewarded when you complete a level or a game. This is one reason I buy multiplatform games on 360 and not PS3, that and XBL is far superior to PSN
Funny. I buy most multiplatform games on my PS3 to avoid the achievements. Please don't say I'm going to have to endure those annoying pop ups on my PS3 games as well! At least give me some way to disable the damn things first.
lol You can disable the achievement and any other pop-up's if you think it detracts from your playing experience by going to your personal settings, notifications and then turn everything off. On note of achievements, I think they have been the most innovative feature this gen behind the Wii-mote. The fact both the Wii and PS3 are trying to imitate them shows how successful a feature it is. I think it gives you more goals, or something to do once you finish a game, thus adding more replay value to games.
Back on topic, it's nice to see Sony finally admit that they've been mistreating gamers with PS3. I'll also echo that I haven't played a game on my PS3 since launch and have used it as a Blu-Ray ever since as there simply aren't anough quality exclusives and since I also own a 360 I buy all my multi-format games for that.
I have said before that the only two titles that remotely interest me on the PS3 are Home and Little Big Planet. Neither are a 'game' in the sense that you can pick it up off the shelf but would both give players useful, creative features and enjoyment.
Also on achievements, i'd rather have them because they do add replay value and can give an indication of how far your friends are into a game or how skilled another player is. Of course they can be abused.
You can turn the pop-up on and off and choose to ignore achievements altogether, they aren't forced upon you.
In fact the 'achievement' system where you are rewarded with trophies and items instead is the most compelling feature of Home.
Do Sony really need to rehash all the previous business mistakes and poor decisions made by gaming companies in the past? It is bad enough they cannot discern their audience with comments like the ones made about Nike or Adidas. At least they're learning from that in respect to new technologies and platforms they're working on.
However, is anyone else reminded of Nintendo's stance to the N64 in Sony's posturing over the PS3?
Reeves also spoke of the diminishing importance of platform exclusives from third parties, as first-party games become more prominent. "We did Buzz, we're doing LittleBigPlanet, Killzone, and there are obviously others that we're developing. We're becoming less dependent on third parties."
Once upon a time I heard the same line rolled out by the head of Nintendo, the same attitude, the same arrogance. Is it something that happens when a company reached its third console? Will Microsoft fall prey to the same retardation?
Third party software is of crucial importance, witnessed during the PS and PS2s life span, and in the poor performance of the Gamecube when third party developers overlooked the console in favour of the MS and Sony offerings.
Sony's success has bred arrogance and laziness. I personally hope Sony face a tough time of it this generation so they'll be toughened from their weak state of mind that's translating into weak business practices. All throughout history empires have risen and fallen based on the same observable trends you can see first in Nintendo's rise and fall into disrepute and now Sony's. It's harder to become a footnote these days, but Sony are lucky they're not doing worse off than they are. I hope they don't squander that luck any more than have tried too.
That's a bit of a rant, Sony are really doing ok, it just frustrates me when people are stupid.
Do Sony really need to rehash all the previous business mistakes and poor decisions made by gaming companies in the past? It is bad enough they cannot discern their audience with comments like the ones made about Nike or Adidas. At least they're learning from that in respect to new technologies and platforms they're working on.
However, is anyone else reminded of Nintendo's stance to the N64 in Sony's posturing over the PS3?
Reeves also spoke of the diminishing importance of platform exclusives from third parties, as first-party games become more prominent. "We did Buzz, we're doing LittleBigPlanet, Killzone, and there are obviously others that we're developing. We're becoming less dependent on third parties."
Once upon a time I heard the same line rolled out by the head of Nintendo, the same attitude, the same arrogance. Is it something that happens when a company reached its third console? Will Microsoft fall prey to the same retardation?
Third party software is of crucial importance, witnessed during the PS and PS2s life span, and in the poor performance of the Gamecube when third party developers overlooked the console in favour of the MS and Sony offerings.
Sony's success has bred arrogance and laziness. I personally hope Sony face a tough time of it this generation so they'll be toughened from their weak state of mind that's translating into weak business practices. All throughout history empires have risen and fallen based on the same observable trends you can see first in Nintendo's rise and fall into disrepute and now Sony's. It's harder to become a footnote these days, but Sony are lucky they're not doing worse off than they are. I hope they don't squander that luck any more than have tried too.
That's a bit of a rant, Sony are really doing ok, it just frustrates me when people are stupid.
That's the best post I've read for ages. You've effectively summed up the incredibly frustrating process of seeing the games industry repeat the same errors time and time agaim.
Why is it only regular folk like us can see the blindingly obvious?
Do Sony really need to rehash all the previous business mistakes and poor decisions made by gaming companies in the past? It is bad enough they cannot discern their audience with comments like the ones made about Nike or Adidas. At least they're learning from that in respect to new technologies and platforms they're working on.
However, is anyone else reminded of Nintendo's stance to the N64 in Sony's posturing over the PS3?
Reeves also spoke of the diminishing importance of platform exclusives from third parties, as first-party games become more prominent. "We did Buzz, we're doing LittleBigPlanet, Killzone, and there are obviously others that we're developing. We're becoming less dependent on third parties."
Once upon a time I heard the same line rolled out by the head of Nintendo, the same attitude, the same arrogance. Is it something that happens when a company reached its third console? Will Microsoft fall prey to the same retardation?
Third party software is of crucial importance, witnessed during the PS and PS2s life span, and in the poor performance of the Gamecube when third party developers overlooked the console in favour of the MS and Sony offerings.
Sony's success has bred arrogance and laziness. I personally hope Sony face a tough time of it this generation so they'll be toughened from their weak state of mind that's translating into weak business practices. All throughout history empires have risen and fallen based on the same observable trends you can see first in Nintendo's rise and fall into disrepute and now Sony's. It's harder to become a footnote these days, but Sony are lucky they're not doing worse off than they are. I hope they don't squander that luck any more than have tried too.
That's a bit of a rant, Sony are really doing ok, it just frustrates me when people are stupid.
To give them their dues Sony have become the best first party games developer of the big 3. would anyone here argue that Ico and Shadow of the Colossus weren't very much better than both the Gamecube Zelda games and the whole party game thing has become tiresome with Mario Party on its 8th iteration and Scene It a poor copy of a ps2/3 game. Singstar and Eye Toy on the other hand are very popular and finding new ways to innovate, most importantly they were original ideas at the time of their inception. Little Big planet points the way forward for Sony a perfect partner for Home and a broad appeal undoubtedly. I think Sony may just be the most underestimated games developer out there. They have always made great games. Oh and as far as Home goes, does anyone really think that Microsoft aren't kicking themselves for not doing the same thing first? For all the stick Sony get they have really stuck their neck out a lot and taken risks. Making PS3 such a well featured piece of hardware, taking their time to release it when it's ready and making home which is a massive undertaking with no cost to the user as well. In comparison Microsoft rushed out a console with major reliability issues Nintendo released a 3 year old tech console that they made a profit off of on every unit sold and still haven't dropped the price despite a 360 being cheaper. Shame Sony are taking such a kicking at the moment but I expect it'll change eventually.
Well it took them long enough to admit they've made a mistake!!
I still think it may be too little too late. And all that talk about nike and adidas really worries me, it shows in black and white sony deserted gamers to chase a non-captive audience! Pointless in every respect. Someone whos into fashion isnt going to spend real money on virtual clothes to ponce about a virtual home, second life already does this! get a grip sony!
I decided to go for PS3 for their rich first-party bloodline - I wanted to experience games that had endeared me so much to PS2 - like the awesome Jak & Daxter & Ratchet & Clank. Uncharted Drakes Fortune is an incredibly impressive new IP - and experience not matched by Sony's competitors.
I nice to see them becoming less dependant on third-party exclusives (I think M$ has become incredibly dependant on third parties for output)
Its the first-party games that attract me, not the third party exclusives like last time.
To give them their dues Sony have become the best first party games developer of the big 3.
And here's where I KNEW that I should take anything you said in the rest of this post with a MASSIVE pinch of salt. Do you seriously believe that Sony is a better first party game maker than Nintendo? *boggle*
Oh and as far as Home goes, does anyone really think that Microsoft aren't kicking themselves for not doing the same thing first? For all the stick Sony get they have really stuck their neck out a lot and taken risks. Making PS3 such a well featured piece of hardware, taking their time to release it when it's ready and making home which is a massive undertaking with no cost to the user as well.
Well, that's one way to look at it. Another would be to say that Sony delayed the PS3 because they wanted to shoe-horn Blu-Ray tech into it, as they saw it a great way to promote their new format.
Shame Sony are taking such a kicking at the moment but I expect it'll change eventually.
Don't forget, we all need to 'work a little bit harder if we are to afford a PS3' It wouldn't surprise me if their arrogance is the reason they aren't doing so well this time - people sticking two fingers up at them.
Face it, Sony assumed that, as the PS1 was a great success, and the PS2 even more so, that the PS3 would continue that trend. The reason they aren't is because the thing was LUDICROUSLY EXPENSIVE compared to the other two 'current gen' systems, and offered nothing extra aside from a new video format when compared to the significantly cheaper Xbox360. Personally, I'm surprised they are doing AS WELL as they are - brand power at it's highest.
jesus christ. so many of you little runts are crying about about the price of a PS3. if you can't afford one tough s**t, buy a 360 and scooter your way back to your council house.
Sony released a console that would appeal to a broad market and be able to use it as a media hub. hence the fact you can whack in a bigger harddrive with ease and do loads of stuff, like watch films, record TV, surf the web.
The PS3 is Sony's answer to a media PC. Games were just added on as a benefit.
they saw what direction entertainment was heading in and have braced it. Home will only cement what they are trying to prove.
Admitedly they looked over their roots but in the process broadened their horizons.
If you want a games console that will last another 2-3 years buy a 360. if you want to go in the direction of how we expect media to change, save up for a PS3 you scabs.
Since ocarina of time sony have made better games than nintendo. I don't have the time to go and get 2 comparative lists but if you do so you will see there's truth in what i say. Since the N64 good games have trickled out of nintendo where as with sony they have managed to innovate continuously releasing great games and a few bad ones. These days sonys big games are better than nintendos big games, a lot of people would agree with that i think. Mario sunshine? Wind waker? Mario kart? Or alternatively ico/soc, god of war, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.
On note of achievements, I think they have been the most innovative feature this gen behind the Wii-mote. The fact both the Wii and PS3 are trying to imitate them shows how successful a feature it is. I think it gives you more goals, or something to do once you finish a game, thus adding more replay value to games.
Rewarding the gamer for completing goals and games have made me love console gaming again.
I have just purchased a PS3 to go alongside the 360 and Wii and I'm a little underwhelmed - The raw power of the PS3 is there but apart from the odd sony exclusive like Rachet and Clank and GT5 Prologue my 360 has been on a longer since the purchase of the PS3.
Since ocarina of time sony have made better games than nintendo. I don't have the time to go and get 2 comparative lists but if you do so you will see there's truth in what i say. Since the N64 good games have trickled out of nintendo where as with sony they have managed to innovate continuously releasing great games and a few bad ones. These days sonys big games are better than nintendos big games, a lot of people would agree with that i think. Mario sunshine? Wind waker? Mario kart? Or alternatively ico/soc, god of war, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.
I see you don't mention Super Mario Galaxy, Super Smash Brothers (and/or Wii Sports and Wii Fit, if that floats your boat)and, as you are referencing Uncharted, which, at best, is 2nd party (published by Sony, but developed by Naughty Dog), you can also look at Metroid Prime Corruption.
If you're going to make that arguement, at least compare the best to the best, as opposed to Nintendos worst to Sonys best...
Since ocarina of time sony have made better games than nintendo. I don't have the time to go and get 2 comparative lists but if you do so you will see there's truth in what i say. Since the N64 good games have trickled out of nintendo where as with sony they have managed to innovate continuously releasing great games and a few bad ones. These days sonys big games are better than nintendos big games, a lot of people would agree with that i think. Mario sunshine? Wind waker? Mario kart? Or alternatively ico/soc, god of war, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.
I see you don't mention Super Mario Galaxy, Super Smash Brothers (and/or Wii Sports and Wii Fit, if that floats your boat)and, as you are referencing Uncharted, which, at best, is 2nd party (published by Sony, but developed by Naughty Dog), you can also look at Metroid Prime Corruption.
If you're going to make that arguement, at least compare the best to the best, as opposed to Nintendos worst to Sonys best...
the fact that i referenced nintendos worst was relevant because at the time of their release they were considered major games. Wind waker was considered at the time to be a huge game not now as reflection shows it to be a poor game not really zelda at all more a spin off. Mario kart is nintendos biggest game at the moment maybe joint with wii fit but the fact is that it isn't a great game, it's a great casual game. If I'm being perfectly honest I'd say it isn't a good game really because of the lack of skill required. Mario sunshine was also considered to be a huge game with massive amounts of publicity and good scores yet again reflection reveals it to be nothing of mario galaxies quality. And then there's metroid prime corruption which i enjoyed immensely until i started to get lost and confused and then bored. The metroid prime trilogy started fantastic and has got worse with each iteration. I'd still give corruption a solid 7/8 but it isn't a killer game that will be remembered and revered as the original metroid prime may well be. I would say that the wii has 2 quality nintendo games at the moment and they are mario galaxy and smash brothers. I doubt we will see another in the consoles life unless another pikmin is in the works.
If you disagree with the things i have said about these games you can always look on metacritic and see that although these games have good scores the concerns i have raised are echoed by many critics and consumers also.
To give them their dues Sony have become the best first party games developer of the big 3. would anyone here argue that Ico and Shadow of the Colossus weren't very much better than both the Gamecube Zelda games and the whole party game thing has become tiresome with Mario Party on its 8th iteration and Scene It a poor copy of a ps2/3 game. Singstar and Eye Toy on the other hand are very popular and finding new ways to innovate, most importantly they were original ideas at the time of their inception. Little Big planet points the way forward for Sony a perfect partner for Home and a broad appeal undoubtedly. I think Sony may just be the most underestimated games developer out there. They have always made great games. Oh and as far as Home goes, does anyone really think that Microsoft aren't kicking themselves for not doing the same thing first? For all the stick Sony get they have really stuck their neck out a lot and taken risks. Making PS3 such a well featured piece of hardware, taking their time to release it when it's ready and making home which is a massive undertaking with no cost to the user as well. In comparison Microsoft rushed out a console with major reliability issues Nintendo released a 3 year old tech console that they made a profit off of on every unit sold and still haven't dropped the price despite a 360 being cheaper. Shame Sony are taking such a kicking at the moment but I expect it'll change eventually.
Please refer to this generation. Nothing yet has been proven other than the casual audience is king: Market effectively a competitively priced product with obvious appeal to a crowd who aren't clued up and you've got a cash cow. That cow is the Wii.
Last generation Sony were king, no doubt about it. I think it's debatable that they were the best first party developer but certainly they were equivalent to anything that Nintendo put out on the Gamecube. However, talking about things as they currently stand I can't agree with you. I'd say Nintendo have reclaimed that crown for the mean time, but I believe third party software is at the very least on par with anything any console company is currently producing. GTA4 is an easy example of why Sony's stance (if this article is representative of the company) is grossly stupid.
Sony have yet to innovate this generation. I disagree with your comments over how they released the PS3 and their approach to Home. The system included Blu Ray as a means to wipe out HD DVD. Sony have a history of format failures as long as my arm and it's inclusion in the Playstation was a hedged bet that it would guaranteed BRs accession. All else is spin which you've gladly bought into.
Further, Sony couldn't release its console any sooner, they had to wait till supply of components meant they could meet release demand. The backwards compatibility gaff also indicates to me they didn't release it when it was ready, but only when they able to release it.
And no, I seriously doubt Microsoft are wishing they did what Sony are trying to do now with Home. The article this forum links off should be adequate illustration.
To sum up, Microsoft have a decent console with games and an online service that appeals to a market they have actively pursued. Nintendo have a console. I'll let you make up your mind as to what exactly it is, but denying the obvious success it has had based upon new technology it has implemented this generation is to me fairly short-sighted.
starvinbull I reckon you're a fanboy who will paint Sony as a Saint no matter what. You are already glossing over many facts about a company and its past practices, while building a house for the PS3 based on the sand of a generation past and the future untold. What does someone say to such a strawman?
The PS3 is Sony's answer to a media PC. Games were just added on as a benefit.
Yes. Games were only added on as a benefit to a brand synonymous with gaming
To give them their dues Sony have become the best first party games developer of the big 3. would anyone here argue that Ico and Shadow of the Colossus weren't very much better than both the Gamecube Zelda games and the whole party game thing has become tiresome with Mario Party on its 8th iteration and Scene It a poor copy of a ps2/3 game. Singstar and Eye Toy on the other hand are very popular and finding new ways to innovate, most importantly they were original ideas at the time of their inception. Little Big planet points the way forward for Sony a perfect partner for Home and a broad appeal undoubtedly. I think Sony may just be the most underestimated games developer out there. They have always made great games. Oh and as far as Home goes, does anyone really think that Microsoft aren't kicking themselves for not doing the same thing first? For all the stick Sony get they have really stuck their neck out a lot and taken risks. Making PS3 such a well featured piece of hardware, taking their time to release it when it's ready and making home which is a massive undertaking with no cost to the user as well. In comparison Microsoft rushed out a console with major reliability issues Nintendo released a 3 year old tech console that they made a profit off of on every unit sold and still haven't dropped the price despite a 360 being cheaper. Shame Sony are taking such a kicking at the moment but I expect it'll change eventually.
Please refer to this generation. Nothing yet has been proven other than the casual audience is king: Market effectively a competitively priced product with obvious appeal to a crowd who aren't clued up and you've got a cash cow. That cow is the Wii.
Last generation Sony were king, no doubt about it. I think it's debatable that they were the best first party developer but certainly they were equivalent to anything that Nintendo put out on the Gamecube. However, talking about things as they currently stand I can't agree with you. I'd say Nintendo have reclaimed that crown for the mean time, but I believe third party software is at the very least on par with anything any console company is currently producing. GTA4 is an easy example of why Sony's stance (if this article is representative of the company) is grossly stupid.
Sony have yet to innovate this generation. I disagree with your comments over how they released the PS3 and their approach to Home. The system included Blu Ray as a means to wipe out HD DVD. Sony have a history of format failures as long as my arm and it's inclusion in the Playstation was a hedged bet that it would guaranteed BRs accession. All else is spin which you've gladly bought into.
Further, Sony couldn't release its console any sooner, they had to wait till supply of components meant they could meet release demand. The backwards compatibility gaff also indicates to me they didn't release it when it was ready, but only when they able to release it.
And no, I seriously doubt Microsoft are wishing they did what Sony are trying to do now with Home. The article this forum links off should be adequate illustration.
To sum up, Microsoft have a decent console with games and an online service that appeals to a market they have actively pursued. Nintendo have a console. I'll let you make up your mind as to what exactly it is, but denying the obvious success it has had based upon new technology it has implemented this generation is to me fairly short-sighted.
starvinbull I reckon you're a fanboy who will paint Sony as a Saint no matter what. You are already glossing over many facts about a company and its past practices, while building a house for the PS3 based on the sand of a generation past and the future untold. What does someone say to such a strawman?
The PS3 is Sony's answer to a media PC. Games were just added on as a benefit.
Yes. Games were only added on as a benefit to a brand synonymous with gaming
Thanks Mappman. CVG forums
Sony owned last generation and the one before that. Last generation Sony had better games than Nintendo and I won't listen to anyone that tries to tell me otherwise. Fact of the matter is that Nintendo have dropped the baton and Sony have picked it up. Do you really think the Twilight Princess is better than Shadow of the Collossus? You have frankly admitted that Nintendo have given up making decent games yet you continue to claim that they are still great game makers. 1 great game does not make a console and to my mind the Wii has 1, when the new God of War and the new Ico and the Killzone 2 etc etc come out will you really still say that Nintendo make better games? Do Nintendo even have any more major games on release lists?
Sony owned last generation and the one before that. Last generation Sony had better games than Nintendo and I won't listen to anyone that tries to tell me otherwise. Fact of the matter is that Nintendo have dropped the baton and Sony have picked it up. Do you really think the Twilight Princess is better than Shadow of the Collossus? You have frankly admitted that Nintendo have given up making decent games yet you continue to claim that they are still great game makers. 1 great game does not make a console and to my mind the Wii has 1, when the new God of War and the new Ico and the Killzone 2 etc etc come out will you really still say that Nintendo make better games? Do Nintendo even have any more major games on release lists?
Yikes, keep your pants on. Most definitely Sony owned the PS/N64 generation, I'd say despite this Nintendo's console saw the better games. I also agree that Sony easily and obviously dominated the PS2, Xbox and GCN era. All I'm saying is that it is subjective which console had the better games. If you believe Sony had better games that's what you believe. I'm not saying you're wrong nor am I asserting Nintendo made better games. You obviously don't listen to anyone, it's apparent you don't read what they write either.
You're relying on games that haven't been released as a means to argue that Sony is the better games maker. Wait until they've been released before making the assertion that they're better. As things stand you'd have to give it to Nintendo for Mario Galaxy (if you want to go by ratings like you've previously indicated).
Even in saying this however, the generation has only just begun and is far from over. I can't be bothered arguing with you over something as silly as who makes better games as things are far from settled. I will dispute all else you have said as it's blatant fanboyism but as to the games, whatever.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
