Sony is the Next Nintendo
by Jake Weston, posted on 08 July 2011 / 19,048 Views
Nintendo holds a very special place in the hearts of millions (if not billions) of gamers around the world, and for good reason. Not only are they almost singlehandedly responsible for gaming's place in pop culture today, but their many mascots and franchises are beloved the world over, from Super Mario, The Legend of Zelda, Pokémon, Metroid, Kirby, and many more. There appears to have been a paradigm shift in recent years, however. As years go by, Nintendo seems to care less and less about the fanbase that brought them where they were today. Between their lack of new IP's for the Wii, or their blatant refusal to bring highly demanded titles to North America, it is clear that Nintendo has seen better days. However, there is a company that is actively trying to take Nintendo's place: Sony.
Sony Computer Entertainment, long known in the industry as second fiddle to the might Nintendo, are finally coming into their own as a company that gamers can consistently turn to for quality. Yes, they've been on the map for their PlayStation brand for the last 15 years now, but it isn't until recently that they're finally becoming known more for their first-party titles and exclusives.
Let's look at the number of new, first-party IP's that Sony has introduced in the last decade. Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, Sly Cooper. God of War, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Resistance, LittleBigPlanet, Killzone, Heavy Rain, the list goes on and on. Compare that to the number of first party IP's that Nintendo has brought to the table, you will find Pikmin, and that's about it. For the last 15 years, Nintendo's entire first party success has relied solely milking the franchises that put them on the map in the 80's and 90's. You could argue that the Wii brought innovation with its motion controls, but other than Wii Play, Wii Music, and Wii Fit, how many first party Nintendo titles were released that weren't part of the series listed above? Almost none.
Sony remains the only first-party publisher that actively tries to introduce new IP's to the market. Sure, Microsoft is up there (and they're certainly ahead of Nintendo), but their only new IP in recent years has been the criminally underrated Alan Wake, and they have been coasting off the success of Halo and Gears of War for some time now. Sony, however, continuously puts out new and innovative IP's, with LittleBigPlanet, InFAMOUS, and Heavy Rain all out in the last couple years alone.
What puts Sony ahead of Microsoft (and how it is closing the gap with Nintendo) is the way Sony attempts to create a community with their titles. Much like Nintendo has made a family all their own with Mario, Zelda, Metroid and Donkey Kong all under the same roof, with crossing over via TV Shows, cereals, and, of course, Super Smash Bros., Sony also does with their properties with almost the same effectiveness. Many of Sony's first party properties are featured as downloadable costumes in LittleBigPlanet, and characters from inFAMOUS, Resistance, and Killzone can be downloaded for play in Uncharted 2's multiplayer. Just this year, Sony released PlayStation Move Heroes, a title that crosses over Jak and Daxter, Ratchet & Clank, and Sly Cooper.
The effect is small, but delibrate. What Sony is doing here is simply the modern day version of how Nintendo hooked us when we were kids, be it with Mario and Zelda cereals or Captain N: The Game Master. Sony is selling you on the "PlayStation Family", and is making the PlayStation brand one that can be recognized not only for its quality games, but the faces attached to those names. It creates an almost sense of continuity between the franchises, and subconsciously gives gamers that warm fuzzy feeling they got back in the good ol' NES to N64 days.
It's also just downright good marketing on their part. I personally didn't discover Resistance, Killzone, or Heavenly Sword until they were featured as skins in LittleBigPlanet . Now, they're some of my favorite current-gen games. Sony must know that this effect would work on others that aren't just me, and it's really a brilliant marketing strategy, prompting gamers to check out games they may have otherwise not (I know it's the reason I'm looking forward to White Knight Chronicles 2 later this year).
Maybe these are all the musings of a blinded fanboy struck with brand loyalty, but how is that any different than how Nintendo's strategy has worked for the last 20 years? If anything, it means it's working. Of course, none of this would work if Sony didn't consistently deliver stellar first-party content. And that's where they separate themselves from Nintendo, at least for now. Yes, Nintendo will always have Mario, Zelda, and Metroid to fall back on, but if you're looking for quality first-party gaming with new and innovative IP's, made by a company that clearly cares about their customers, Sony is the way to go.
Quality new IPs? Yes. Universally Recognizable brand-names? Barring Gran Turismo, no. If Sony had built up some of the solid names they had been building up in the PlayStation era (Crash comes to mind), they could have built the kind of instantly-recognizable superpower franchises that Sega held in its heyday, or Nintendo still runs
- +47
- +3
The problem with Sony is that they have too many 1st party exclusives! There is no one or two defying ones, there is just too many. Like MS has Halo and Gears, and Nintendo has, Mario, Zelda and Metroid.
Sony simply has too many great games...
- -5
The only problem with trying to make Crash/Spyro their own mascot was Sony didn't own the rights to them (Universal Studios did, I believe). They certainly should have done something with Ratchet & Clank, Jak & Daxter or even Sly Cooper and his gang. There could have definitely been toy lines and other things.
- 0
This is the writers response on his own profile (I am not defending him, just showing what he has said in regards to his own writing):
"Hey guys, I just want to let you know I read most of the comments that get posted on my articles and I actually take most of the criticism to heart and try to use them to improve my future articles :)
Yes it was serious, the main point I was trying to get across that as a first party publisher, Sony strives more for new and original IP's than Nintendo, which relies heavily on legacy series. That's not to say that Sony is better than Nintendo, I was just saying I felt that the position Sony is in now is not unlike Nintendo when they first started out.
While I still believe in my stance, I agree that the article could have used a little more focus in trying to get my point across. As for the "too many opinions stated as fact", the thing is about persuasive articles is that they are by nature almost all opinions, and stating things like "in my opinion" to the end of all my claims would come off as redundant and cluttered.
All in all though, I think much of the criticism for this article has a lot of validity. I really appreciate the feedback and I will definitely keep all of it in mind for the future. "
- 0
Extremely poorly written. I suggest VGChartz denies this kind of articles to be written by kids who started gaming on the PS2. This is blatant historical revisionism and it's cringeworthy at best.
- +35
Who wrote this article ? Sony was already the 'next' nintendo back in the PS2 days.. i owned a PS2, we all did.. 'Heart warming' fanboy articles like this do very little for me. You say they ( Sony ) "..attempts to create" community with their titles.. but dont show they actually have accomplished this. In fact I think MS has done this better with its implementation of Xbox Live..
- -7
After careful consideration I came to the conclusion that this is a serious article this time, so I'll reply to it as such. You are really jumping the gun here. Sony still has a very, very, very, very, very long way to go before you can make such a claim. At this point in time Sony can't even claim dominance on their own platforms as it is still third party games that feature the most prominent faces on PlayStation systems. Additionally, sales of sequels to Sony's IPs haven't really shown an upwards trend in their popularity, so you can't even say that Sony's cross-game promotion strategy works. More often than not sales have decreased or merely remained flat with each new game in a series. And that's all I needed to say.
- +35
Of course I expected YOU out of all people to post. Uncharted 2 easily surpassed the sales of Uncharted 1, but what's funnier is that because of Uncharted 2, Uncharted 1's sales had increased (first party), GT has been consistently selling well especially on a smaller install base than previous generation. KZ3 is on track to match and even surpass KZ2 despite the "mediocreness" that KZ1 was branded as. InFamous 2 is doing fairly well despite being a new IP. The only one that suffered a drop off was Resistance 2, but then again that is a third party while inFamous is second party iirc. Demon's Souls despite being from FromSoftware had direct assistance and oversight from SCEJ so it's roaming near a 2nd/1st party game and that was successful with its first entry. MAG sold pretty well, Heavy Rain blew expectations and made many of you eat crow (felt soooo good, but i'll give u that their not considered 1st party). LBP 2 is selling well despite the launch date fiasco (delayed from holidays to the worst months of the year). Then of course we have GOW3 which has outsold all other GOW's despite being on a much smaller install base so umm yea. I understand you have invested alot in your Nintendo stock but plz think before you post once in a while, I love your overall humor but now you are just outright being a hater. I know it hurt how badly PS1 and 2 smacked the N64 and Gamecube and that is what allowed Nintendo to open their eyes to improve their strategy to finally be back on top again, and for that you should be thankful. From here on it will be a back and forth, that I am sure of.
- -12
I think you've listed pretty much all games of Sony that either have surpassed or still have a chance to surpass their predecessors. I am not sure why you would think that adding a few insults would improve your argument, but that's something I don't take to heart anyway.
How are Socom, Ratchet & Clank, Jak & Daxter (was on the PSP), Motorstorm, Patapon, Loco Roco, wipEout and Everybody's Golf doing lately? Twisted Metal doesn't look like it's going to be a growing franchise either. I don't know about you, but I think that justifies my claim that Sony's IPs more often than not fail to increase in popularity and therefore in overall relevance. Add in the EyeToy experiment that faded away rather quickly and you see where I am coming from.
- +6
How is Star Fox doing? or Kirby, Metroid, Donkey Kong, Pikmin, Golden Sun and Fire Emblem?
Nintendo has three Franchises going for them (not counting fitness and mini game collections) and even Zelda doesn't carry the same weight it used to outside the gaming community.
- -7
I am not sure why you would disregard certain games, other than knowing that your argument is poor to begin with. You make it sound like Nintendo doesn't have that much more going for them than Sony, but if we are to compare Nintendo and Sony published games on home consoles this generation, we see:
Games above 1m: NIntendo (27), Sony (23).
Games above 2m: Nintendo (11), Sony (13).
Games above 3m: Nintendo (5), Sony (8).
Games above 4m: Nintendo (4), Sony (4).
Games above 5m: Nintendo (3), Sony (1).
Hm, it actually looks pretty even, but when we look at the games above five million which really is the treshold that separates the good sellers from the actual hardware movers, then Nintendo takes the victory home.
On second thought, I believe I accidently compared Sony's PlayStation 3 numbers to Nintendo's Gamecube numbers. That would mean that Sony, who according to this editorial is stronger than ever, has yet to outclass Nintendo when they hit rock bottom and had to sell their games to a userbase of a pitiful 21m units.
- +7
Is that really your whole argument? Lets look at sales then.
What are Nintendo's top exclusives this generation? Just looking at the top 10 I see 5 mario games, 2 fitness games and 3 mini game collections. Where are all the recognizable brand names?
15 of their top 50 sellers are Mario games.
8 of them are in the "Wii" series of games.
Only one game outside of those two franchises sold above 5 million units and that is Zelda, which came out in 2006.
The fact is, not counting Mario and Pokemon, Nintendo franchises simply don't carry the same mass appeal they used to.
- -4
Is that really your whole argument? Lets look at sales then.
What are Nintendo's top exclusives this generation? Just looking at the top 10 I see 5 mario games, 2 fitness games and 3 mini game collections. Where are all the recognizable brand names?
15 of their top 50 sellers are Mario games.
8 of them are in the "Wii" series of games.
Only one game outside of those two franchises sold above 5 million units and that is Zelda, which came out in 2006.
The fact is, not counting Mario and Pokemon, Nintendo franchises simply don't carry the same mass appeal they used to.
- -6
I thought it was pretty interesting that Nintendo at their lowest point was still stronger than Sony at their height which is right now. Also, Nintendo is at a disadvantage here, because they sold their games to a 21m userbase while Sony with the PS3 has an addressable market of more than 50m consoles already.
Your new argument isn't any good either, because Donkey Kong Country Returns sits already at 4.88m and will soon cross the 5m mark you talk about. So it's not just Zelda that sold 5m, there's going to be another game as well that does the same and thus defeats your notion that Nintendo isn't capable anymore of putting out a 5m seller that doesn't belong to one of those series that apparently do not count.
Why do those other games not count? I don't know. Hey, how about we turn the tables around on this one? All Nintendo games count, but Gran Turismo and Uncharted do not anymore. Is that fair?
Of course it isn't. It makes no sense to do something like this. You are constantly shifting goal posts to disregard sales of certain Nintendo games entirely, namely their most popular titles, in order to make Nintendo look worse than they actually are.
And you have yet to say anything about how I was wrong about anything that I said about Sony. How about the next time you respond, you approach it from the angle of making a case pro-Sony instead of anti-Nintendo?
- +5
I never said they didn't count, and I am not arguing that Nintendo games don't sell well. I am saying that they only have two mega franchises left.
If you want to count the "Wii" series of games go right ahead but that's nothing to brag about.
Donkey Kong is selling okay but not that much better than The PS3's top exclusives and with 30 million more Wii consoles sold that isn't saying much.
I am not defending this news article or arguing that Sony is the next Nintendo, and I never tried to. Also I am not anti Nintendo, I like Nintendo. My problem is that most of the people in this thread seem to think that it is 1996 when Nintendo as a software developer was at the top of its game.
They need new franchises, any Nintendo fan would have to agree unless they are blinded by their own love for the company. How many more Mario games you think they can make before people get tired of him too?
.
- -4
Only two mega franchises left? Which of their games ceased to be mega franchises? In other words which games used to sell 5+m, but don't or can't do this anymore? Furthermore, everything with Mario on it isn't part of the same series, it's just the same character in different games. For example, Super Mario Bros. is its own series, Mario Kart is another and most importantly, Super Smash Bros. most definitely is a different series in which the Mario universe only plays a minor part.
Why would the Wii series be nothing to brag about? It showed that Nintendo can introduce new IPs that sell 10+m copies and that means the gap between Nintendo and Sony is actually getting larger.
That Donkey Kong argument sounds oddly familiar. It's the same I have already used when I talked about the GC vs. PS3. So basically you must agree then that what Sony achieved this gen isn't saying much.
Nintendo sold more software this generation than they ever did before. That IS being at the top of one's game and claiming otherwise is beyond ridiculous.
How many more Mario games they can make? Well, they've sold more of them this generation than ever before and Mario exists since well over two decades already. I think this means that Mario never gets old and since you can't prove otherwise, statements like this just make you look desperate.
- +4
Poorly thought-out article. Sony has certainly gotten much better first party-wise but their IPs still don't hold the mass appeal of Nintendo's . And where does Nintendo fit into all this? If Sony is the next Nintendo, then what is Nintendo...next? Will they just vanish into thin air or something?
- +24
I would like to add that this must be the musings of a blinded fanboy struck with brand loyalty after all, since you say the only new IP Nintendo made in the last decade is Pikmin.
- +9
Actually no, what the article was TRYING to say was that Sony is trying to be the next nintendo, not that they were there yet. it's funny that you claim it's poorly thought out when in reality it was just poorly read.
- -9
Well, Runa216, this then means that there are a whole lot of people here on VGC with extremely poor reading comprehension and this extends beyond just Nintendo fans as absolutely none of our most well respected members thought that this is an actually good editorial.
You are a member of the staff, so I can understand that you defend one of your colleagues, but this doesn't have to (and shouldn't) come at the cost of insulting the intelligence of your readership.
- +8
It's difficult to take the article seriously when it simply ignores or discounts the most the most successful franchise additions since 2000 . Nintendogs/Cats, The brain age series, The Wii series , Prof Llayton, Animal Crossing, Rhythm Heaven have all consistently produced the kinds of sales that Sony can only dream of. Additionally Nintendo has always been quite selective about adding new franchises . Their rate of franchise addition isn't THAT much lower since 2000 than it was in the period 1990-2000. They manage their franchises EXTREMELY carefully and have consistently shown that they can adapt their franchises to multiple different styles of play. More importantly - Nintendo has kept its franchise stable relevant and inserted its key franchise characters into popular culture in a way that Sony has never come close to. I'm guessing the author of the article has no children. Pokemon releases STILL have a significant effect on school attendance in Japan around their release date. THAT'S franchise power. Lets look at the franchises that Sony has introduced in the same timeframe. We can skip GT since the introduction is before the authors timeline. Additionally the series is selling a fraction of what it used to. God of War, Little Big Planet and Uncharted have done well. Infamous is by Nintendo standards a terrible flop commercially . Additionally Sony has done a poor job of keeping its existing franchise stable viable. Take a look at the list of 100 most successful Sony published games (easy do on this site). The numbers are a fraction of Nintendo's and many of the games lack a strong character to base future games on. Several Sony franchises are dying - SOCOM sales are horrible and diminishing. Ratchet sales are half of what they used to be (and it never took off in Japan), Killzone has yet to break a million in any single region on Ps3. Resistance doesn't look like its going to be a serious contender over the long term . The only really solid point in the article is how Sony copied Nintendo's strategy of cross marketing its franchises with one another. However since none of their franchises have anything like the same universal appeal they haven't been able to derive the same benefits from it. Realistically the last 7 years have gone very poorly for Sony for a variety of reasons - all of which have been analyzed to death already. The article attempts to put a nice spin on things but Sony's and Nintendo's strategies have been very different. For the last 10 years it's also been very clear who has been making more money. There are lots of things that Sony is REALLY good at but they are NOWHERE NEAR Nintendo when it comes to franchise management. Love em or hate em - no one touches Nintendo when it comes to franchise management and the numbers bear this out over and over.
- +19
- +16
- +14
"But if you're looking for quality first-party gaming with new and innovative IP's, made by a company that clearly cares about their customers, Sony is the way to go." But, but... "Maybe these are all the musings of a blinded fanboy struck with brand loyalty" Ok, this explains it all...
- +13
This article is downright insulting towards Nintendo. The way people describe new IPs on here is downright amusing. Criteria are twisted here and there so that nothing Nintendo makes counts. Almost all Wii series games are different experiences. In addition, somebody seems to have completely forgotten the word "handheld". What the heck do you call Nintendogs? And, heck, I'd say different new Mario/Pokemon/etc. spin-off brands should count as well if you wanna compare new IPs. Nintendo is given a lot of undue hate in this area when most of their most successful work this generation consists of new IPs. Also, you're getting too hopeful - this apparent PlayStation family is practically uncomparable to Nintendo's family simply because of their different levels of success. Mario, Pokemon and the like hit much higher just on their first shot. I won't say that Sony IPs can never achieve such success, but, even if they do, it simply won't be the kind to be called the "Next Nintendo" because it'll have to be much more gradual. Finally, I hate to criticize anything on this site, but the last part is utter flamebait. A "company that clearly cares about their customers"? Really? I'm actually gonna fall for it and laugh since you're in denial. No company that cares a shred for its customers would add Bluray to the PS3 when it drives the price up to unprecedented levels just to promote a part of its company that PS fans didn't even necessarily care about. I'm rather disappointed - you even forgot the "this is only the author's opinion" disclaimer that you include for far less insulting articles!
- +13
ummm, no. Sony is nowhere near as ingrained into the public consciousness as Nintendo or their IPs are, not by a long-shot. Forget Mario, Link, or Samus, Sony doesn't have anyone that even matches Master Chief in terms of an icon. Regardless of whether you think those IPs are good or not, they're nowhere near as successful or acclaimed as Nintendo's stuff is. This is just simple knowledge. Come back in ten or twenty years and see if ANY of Sony's IPs are still around
- +12
Yet another ridiculous article from Jake Weston. I haven't seen that guy write a single quality article yet.
http://gamrfeed.vgchartz.com/story/87107/how-to-tell-youre-playing-a-bad-game/
I thought that was pretty good.
- +1
I found that a bit weird as well. Must be including every Console, Handheld, PC and Mobile gamer... Even then I think we're pushing it. If we add board games, we get there though, XD
- +2
Still, it doesn't come even close. You need to take into account that one person can own several consoles (Wii, ds, ps3, board games) and many times the same console (3 ps3s 5dss etc). There are like 7 billion people in world (not sure about this)? I first read the negative comments and felt bad for him, but then I read this... Really bad journalism I'm afraid. I hope he's more careful from now on.
- +2
- 0
Is this article serious? On what planet is Playstation Move Heroes an example of effect cross-game promotion strategy anywhere remotely close to Super Smash Brothers? It's not a good sign when your argument falls apart by a taking quick look at data supplied by the very site you're writing for.
- 0
Sony doesn't even have any MASCOT(S). That's why they have made so many new IPs. It's to see if one of the stick with us consumers, but they don't. Plus, I don't know anyone locally who talks about the games mentioned above. Everything I hear is Nintendo...well, I work at a daycare, so :-P And yes, Sony has TONS of catching up to do with Nintendo. Their customer service isn't all great from what my friends tell me. My GBASP wasn't working right, so I sent it into Nintendo for repairs. Guess what? I get a *NEW* GBASP instead. Just recently, I had trouble registering my Zelda OoT 3D (got it and registered it on the release date) on their website and I didn't get the mentioning of the CD soundtrack. I messaged Nintendo about not getting the offer when registering and guess what? Nintendo sent me the CD nevertheless even though the offer never came up (stupid IE9 lol). So really, Sony isn't the next Nintendo. They are in a league of their own. Hell, if Sony were smart enough, their business practice should be making a profit on selling hardware instead of losing it. And they wouldn't tell their customers to get another job just so that we could afford their hardware. There's my rant for 'this article.' Articles should be REVIEWED by the staff BEFORE being posted. This article is only asking to be flamed with negative comments...like mine above.
There are so many reasons why this article is crap, but other people already said why for me so I don't need to waste my time typing a long ass paragraph!
- Hi, Trauma Center, how are you ? - Fine, Disaster, thanks, and you ? - Fine too ! Do you know my brother, Endless Ocean ? - Yeah i know him. He is the Odama's best friend ! - Oh, Odama, you mean the Electroplankton's father ? - Yeah, it's him. I prefer his grandfather, you know...Xenoblade. - He rocks ! But I prefer his wife, The Last Story. - Do you know their childrens ? Mario & Luigi saga, Zangeki, Chibi-Robo !, Another Code, Hotel Dusk, Wii Games (sports, play and fit), Magical Starsign, Golden Sun, Rythm Paradise, Elite Beat Agents, Pandora's Tower... - Ouah, a lot of childrens ! - Yeah. And a lot of new Nintendo's IP too. All new games, all published by Nintendo. This article is pure bullshit. - I know that.
"a company that clearly cares about their customers, Sony is the way to go" Cares enough to keep their customers' information safe from hackers. Cares enough that they insulted all of their customers by claiming that their customers were "willing to pay anything" for their consoles at E3 when they announced the outrageously high priced PS3. Cares enough that they claimed to "change everything" with Move, months after Nintendo launched Wii Motion Plus, which was already one-to-one motion control. Sony-biased (paid?) articles are not as convincing as historical fact. If Nintendo didn't care about its' customers, they would fail to innovate, they would fail to try new things that nobody else is doing, and they'd have announced that Wii U's graphics processor was at least twice as strong as the PS3's. Because Nintendo does care about its' customers, they innovate, create new experiences that everyone else copies (analog controls, motion controls, touch screen controls), and continue to release the IP that fans demand and know. The 3 Japanese Wii games notwithstanding, Nintendo knows how to deliver quality.
-Sony love consumer because they create new IP it dosnt metter if is not as good then mario but at least they trie.
-Sony love consumer by loosing money for each console to make the best technological console
-Sony improove nintendo innovation and not a bad copy of nintendo innovation
-3DS innovate with 3D but the price they make 150 profits 3 i don't know how nintendo love consumer
-Nintendo has a lack of new IP they are many consumer would have new Ip .
- -5
@small44
Who says that Nintendo actually NEEDS new IP. Would be nice, sure, but they don't. At least, not much.
- 0
Sorry to say this but this is complete BS. Sony still can't stand even in the shadow of Nintendo when it comes to making good franchises. The only really good franchise Sony has right now is Gran Turismo. The rest are decent when you consider it as franchises. I'm not saying they don't make good games though because God of War for instance are great games but not a great franchise. I would name a dozen more companies before even mentioning Sony when it comes to making good franchises.
- +1
Sigh... I'm a Sony fanboy, more or less, and I can't bring myself to defend this article. There are premises, and a conclusion, but they really no tie together and the author really hasn't presented enough evidence. I see people flaming this, and I can't blame them for doing so. You just can't throw something like this up (pun intended) with so little substance behind it.
This article is so badly written that I'm finished with Vgchartz until Jake Weston doesn't work here anymore. Honestly Vgchartz hire an editor for crying out loud. Who read this and said ''Oh yea this is well researched and fine to publish'' Nintendo has only introduced pikmin? Oh right yea Nintendogs and the wii series being some of the best selling games ever but your 'writer' didn't know about them. I will return to vgchartz in 6 months and see if the quality of writing is still so awful. Oh and here's a hint for you if an article finishes with ''Maybe these are all the musings of a blinded fanboy struck with brand loyalty'' then guess what? They are and good grief this person shouldn't be writing articles. Every person working here who has Editor in their title should be ashamed and Brett you should feel bad about hiring someone like this.
Blargh. How is this different to 1000s of moronic forum posts? To many poor "editorials" recently - I won't bother reading them anymore.
This is a very poorly thought-out and poorly written article. You got one thing right, though, it's the musings of a blind fan boy. IPs: it's not even a comparison in sales or universal appeal. Sony franchises appeal to the 13-24 year old male almost exclusively. Nintendo appeals to everyone (not "teh kiddie", EVERYONE) in the same way Disney does. They've established a universal brand and style and quality that's distinct to them. You can argue that all you want but you'll be falling back to your personal taste -- I'm talking about universally recognized aesthetic value. It's the difference between 3 million and 30 million in sales. Shit even Nintendo's BAD games sell 3 million. You could argue fanboys of Nintendo but then you'd have to accept that they created 60 million brand new fanboys this generation. There's obviously way more to it. Second, and this is also important: Sony doesn't innovate. Button layout, the analog stick, motion controls, everything has been a shameless ripoff of Nintendo. You can say "EYE TOY!" but they never went anywhere or did anything with it. It remained a novel peripheral and nothing more. Say what you will about how much you personally hate Nintendo's recent hardware decisions, but one thing you have to accept is that they have huge balls. They took a huge risk (twice Wii and DS) and bet the whole company on the goddamn thing. As much as I hate Microsoft personally, they have a far better chance of taking over that mantle than Sony ever will, primarily because of reason #2. Rather than shamelessly rip off Nintendo, they went in an entirely different direction with Kinect. It will have a lot of great integration features like voice commands to squad mate AI or even just pointing on the screen where you want something to go. Point is, it's a new and interesting direction and once the "ooh motion!" dies down what you end up with is a powerful and robust interface you pick and choose from. What did Sony do? Exact same thing Nintendo did, as usual. The difference? People actually talk about Kinect, no one cares about or even knows about Move. Anyway: shit analysis, shit writing, shit article. I can't believe they let you publish this fanboy flamebait.
This generation, Nintendo introduced a number of new franchises and franchise re-inventions: Wii Fit, Wii Sports, New Super Mario Bros, Mario Galaxy, Mario and Sonic Olympics (with Sega), Wii Party, Brain Age, Nintendogs, etc... Those new franchises Nintendo introduced had mass market appeal, and most of those were FAAAAAR more commercially successful than anything Sony released this generation; and Gran Turismo aside, anything Sony ever released in its history. Sony to date has only had one mega-successful franchise. The reason Sony is flooding the market with new franchises is because they haven't seen Nintendo-like success with their old franchises. Even their key franchise Gran Turismo has drastically declined in sales. Nintendo doesn't have that problem; they also took existing franchises like Mario Kart and Pokemon and sold tens of millions of copies with them. Many of Nintendo's franchises have tremendous staying power; this is something Sony lacks. This is why Nintendo is in a category of its own, and Sony is not currently on the same path.
For shame VGChartz. I'd hoped this kind of attention-whoring side-taking was beneath this site.
I'm staggered by this article. It's all over the place. As the author themselves brought it up I guess I am entitled to agree that words 5 to 14 of the final paragraph pretty much sum up the article. The rest is immaturely written and has some ludicrous assertions and comparisons.
Most of this article has been picked over, so I shall avoid repeating all that. The one error I would like to focus on, that has been so far un-addressed is "As years go by, Nintendo seems to care less and less about the fanbase that brought them where they were today." I'm afraid this is just incorrect. One of the main target audiences with the DS and Wii are those who were gaming in the Nes and Snes era.
yes, and 'caring' about your fanbase doesnt equate to games or consoles sold.. we can argue about quality till your blue in the face but the fact is PS3 is in last place in games sold of all the current gen consoles..
- +3
@scottie -- An argument I can state with great certainty that many, many Nintendo fans would take strong issue with. The whole big deal about the last few E3s was precisely how much Nintendo seems to have given up on said fanbase with the Wii's rapidly expanding success. And even with their admittedly impressive 2010 E3, they've still been almost entirely reliant on regurgitating new franchises. There have been new IPs, more so than the article gives credit for, but Nintendo has hardly put the same amount of weight behind it like Sony has. Because of that, you could make the point that Sony has done more to continually reinforce the trust and loyalty of their fanbase.
@rf40928 -- Well, like I said in another comment, this is kind of the point of the article after all... But even then, it's not exactly like Sony is doing poorly. "Last place" in this context is one of those technically-correct-but-false-in-representation statements. They are virtually neck and neck with Microsoft, which is especially significant given Microsoft's tremendous headstart, both with the full year of no competition before the PS3 released and after Sony stumbled badly out of the starting gate.
So, saying Sony is in last place for this generation so far, at this point in time, is like saying that Apple has significantly less market share than Microsoft. Yeah, technically true, but...
- -6
@firestorm
You forget that Sony was in first place last generation. PS2 is still the best selling console worldwide. Sony personally thought brand loyalty would come into play with the PS3 but nothing of the sort has taken place. Yes, if we look at Sony this generation, they are neck and neck with M$. But looking at last generation, you would think Sony 2003 vs. Sony 2006 were two different companies. One made a affordable system, while the other created a unsustainable online marketplace (this has nothing to do with the hack incident). They Sony has personally over saturated their own market, and the reason I think they have is because they thought the PS3 would be selling better. With so many games coming out this year, PS3 exclusives are really getting hurt by each other sales wise.
- +2
1. This article is rife with grammar mistakes. 2. You knock Nintendo for not publishing games like Xenoblade in North America, yet you ignore the fact that Sony has decided not to publish White Knight Chronicles II in North America, despite mentioning the game further down in your editorial. This and other hypocritical statements demonstrate how your view of this subject matter is incredibly one-sided. 3. There is no way this line is not absolute bullshit, given you write (if you can call it that) for a video game website: "I personally didn't discover Resistance, Killzone, or Heavenly Sword until they were featured as skins in LittleBigPlanet . Now, they're some of my favorite current-gen games." How the hell do these articles get approved?
One question: Has dedicating to new IP's payed off as well as it's two competitors market strategy? If the answer is no (and it should be), than It's pretty clear that software sales wise, a lot of people are playing M$ and Nintendo games. Sony is doing O.K. for itself, but like how RolStoppable said, sales haven't increased for many first party I.P.'s for Sony. All games have a fan base, but I think your over-dramatizing the idea that only Sony has created a cult following of multiple games. Fable, Halo, Gears, are highly successful franchises, that seem to have a larger following (which is paying off very well for M$ and gamers M$ gamers, for those are the games to be playing). Regardless, I think your really basing this off of opinion (which is fanboyism). Also, Sony hasn't done that well (excluding 2010) profit wise when it comes to the PS3, so why would you say they are doing well if their stock holders aren't even happy? I think the "underdog" mentality really does proliferate the PS community, cause a lot of people feel Sony should be number one right now, when in all actuality, they have done everything they can do stop that from happening, by not profiting on PSN like M$ with XBL, to making multiple first party exclusives to the point of over saturation within their own software market that they control, all the way to making a console that costs far more to make than they are asking people to pay (I know this stopped in 2010). Sony is in third, and this just sounds like another fanboy rally call to have everyone band together and save a company that used to be in 1st last generation.
How is this news? It is neither factual or, indeed factually correct. It is badly written and is purely fanboy opinion being passed off as fact. Terrible article, makes the site look totally unprofessional.
I will agree that Sony is doing a really good job in making new franchises. At the same time Nintendo didn't only have Pikmin LOL. From 2001-2011 Nintendo created: Luigi's Mansion, Paper Mario, WarioWare, Pikmin, Animal Crossing, Chibi-Robo, Wii series, Big Brain Academy, Endless Ocean, Rhythm Heaven, Nintendogs, Brain Age, and Professor Layton. Also, I still think that Xenoblade, The Last Story, and Pandora's Tower are all releasing in America in 2012. You might not like games like Brain Age or the Wii series but they are still new franchises and good ones IMO. By the way, you can't really compare Microsoft and its new franchises because you were talking about the last 10 years...so all of Microsofts franchises are within your new-10 year range.
This generation, Nintendo introduced a number of new franchises and franchise re-inventions: Wii Fit, Wii Sports, New Super Mario Bros, Mario Galaxy, Mario and Sonic Olympics (with Sega), Wii Party, Brain Age, Nintendogs, etc... Those new franchises Nintendo introduced had mass market appeal, and most of those were FAAAAAR more commercially successful than anything Sony released this generation; and Gran Turismo aside, anything Sony ever released in its history. Sony to date has only had one mega-successful franchise. The reason Sony is flooding the market with new franchises is because they haven't seen Nintendo-like success with their old franchises. Even their key franchise Gran Turismo has drastically declined in sales. Nintendo doesn't have that problem; they also took existing franchises like Mario Kart and Pokemon and sold tens of millions of copies with them. Many of Nintendo's franchises have tremendous staying power; this is something Sony lacks. This is why Nintendo is in a category of its own, and Sony is not currently on the same path.
Apparently you forget that Nintendo released the Power Pad back with their initial console. Wii Fit, Wii Sports, Sonic Olympics are all copies of that game. In fact, they are bad copies because the original was far superior than the new ones. What is sad, is that people continue to support a company that milks it's customers. Great for Nintendo, bad for the industry. I want games that not only look and sound amazing, but play that way as well. We will see how far Nintendo push that this time around. My bet is they will be at or below current consoles and the new releases from Sony and M$ will blow Nintendo out of the water like they did this gen. Will they sell more? Maybe not, less sheep on the M$ and Sony side.
- -8
My bet is that you also think Superman 4 is the greatest movie of all time; which, quite frankly, tells all that anyone needs to know about your "taste".
My guess is that you've got your PS3 hooked up under your bridge.
- 0
"Yes, Nintendo will always have Mario, Zelda, and Metroid to fall back on, but if you're looking for quality first-party gaming with new and innovative IP's, made by a company that clearly cares about their customers, Sony is the way to go." This is wrong on so many levels. Sony's new IPS become old in a matter or a year. Due to the constant let's make a sequel business plan the have. How can I really appreciate how great Uncharted 2 is when part 3 is already on the way before it's released. Now finally the care about the customer statement. What the hell was the PSN Hack Issue then. It all started when Sony took back the Linux Feature that their customers paid for. Then the entire handling of the PSN issue. So taking something from paying customers, and risking their bank accounts. Is better than not giving gamers something to spend their money on. LOL!!! If anything Sony could be the next Sega, but even that would be pushing it.
I can't believe this needs to be stated more but TONS of companies, including government agencies that hold everyone's information and are supposed to have the best security around, get hacked all the time. Nintendo was also hacked, they just don't hold much customer info or have a unified network (something Nintendo fans really wont) like SONY due so it wasn't nearly as big of a deal. Some people complain about how soon SONY notifed people but it's been pointed out they've notified much earlier than industry standard. They've made more than one public apology, offered everyone who was effected like over 50$ in free shit, and PS+ members got an extension of 2 months on their service even though we only missed out on 3 weeks. I'm sorry SONY didn't bend over for you after the incident but I think they did pretty well.
Linux was removed AFTER it was exploited by Geohot. Hackers struck first. It wasn't simply SONY saying "hey, lets remove Linux to save money" they had a REASON. There feature was already there. It was cost more to remove than to leave it alone. It compromised the system. Do you know how bad SONY hacking is getting right now? I know a guy that just took 40 in stuff from the PSN store because he feels he was "entitled" to it after he got banned for being on the developers server even though he's user pirating shit and abusing exploits. and before anyone says anything, I know this guy personally. He's an admitted pirate.
- -3
Sony still has a long way to go to be compared to Nintendo, but it's true and undeniable that they'be been doing better recently when it comes to original IPs. That's basically the only point in this article, disregarding if it was well said or not, it's correct.
Ok, the article has been read. Now, come back again 25 years from now, you will probably see someone complaining about "how sony is just milking uncharted, that 25 year old IP". Or, maybe not, maybe we will be partying the 50-year old anniversary of Zelda and somebody will point out "remember when Sony began to make games? What was that barbarian game Sony made? Like a Greek Conan... Oh, whatever... ZELDA!"
It was painful to read that, not quite going to the dentist to have my teeth drilled painful, though. But nonetheless, lets clear up some confusion on behalf of the author. Not one of those Sony Ips that you mentioned (with the exception of GT, which strangely wasn't cited) has even a chance of competing with Nintendo's bread and butter titles, especially when it comes to universal appeal and dare I say longetivity. Seriously, I like Sony and their stuff, but is anyone going to remember or even care about Killzone 10 years from now? Or Sly Cooper? Or Infamous? I'd wager no. There's a reason why Mario, Link, Samus and company have been around for nearly 25 years, their games are consistently awesome. As for new Nintendo Ips, check out Xenoblade and The Last Story, hell, I hear even Pandora's Tower is pretty tight. In closing, and in my opinion, Sony is not the next Nintendo, nobody is the next Nintendo in this industry except Nintendo.
The fact that this comparison exists is ridiculous. You are talking about the most beloved franchises of all time, are they just supposed to stop making them? Tell me when Rockstar abandons the GTA franchise, or EA "The Sims", Activision with guitar hero, blizzard with warcraft Diablo and Starcraft, ID with Doom and Quake, Capcom with Resident Evil, Konami with Metal Gear and Silent Hill. They won't because those titles are at the same level of popularity and fame that Nintendo's franchises are, if that. As for Sony, you can't really make that comparison with Sony because they don't have any old titles to abandon. They made televisions and other items for your home entertainment systems in the past, nothing else. So unless they buy out capcom or something, they can't really remake anything. Finally they have been remaking what little old ip they have. Jak and Daxter has been ongoing since early PS2, GT since PS1. I seriously don't know why I read the articles on this site.
- -5
Silent Hill isn't even close to popular. Neither is Guitar Hero anymore, and please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems Doom and Quake are not really relevant in today's world of military shooters. As for remakes, are you implying that remakes are better than original games? Why should it matter if they make remakes? A good game is a good game regardless of if it is a remake or not.
- -1
This website just never learns does it.....You wonder why the gaming world doesn't take this place seriously, well this article is a fine example. If you can call it an article of course. More of a fanboy prediction then anything. All Nintendo have to do is create a game with Mario in the title and that = sales and high exposure. Nintendo have iconic brands that are known to just about anyone. You put a picture of Mario,Luigi,Donkey Kong,Link,any Pokemon and everyone in the world knows what they are. Sony has none of those types of characters. To the people talking about sales and games like GT Nintendo has 19 of the top 20 biggest selling games of all time. There is no comparison.....
Are you kidding me? Sony's a semi-decent developer. I'd hardly call them impressively original, no more so than most other developers. If you're implying Nintendo isn't innovative or original because of their propensity to work within their established franchises, I think you're ignoring a lot of the great new work they do. New characters =/ innovation. Sony does have Fumito Ueda, though, and that man is probably the best auteur game designer in the business right now. I'd buy anything he made.
Not really. Those games don't sell, sadly. The only BIG ones are Gran Turismo, and arguably Ratchet and Clank/Uncharted. Nintendo won their place for many reasons, most importantly being something for everyone. Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Mario Kart, Pikmin, The Last Story and Animal Crossing, for example, all represent different genres. Sony doesn't have this split... As for the Sony IP's, many of these games are either 1 game only (SotC, ICO) which didn't sell very well, or just didn't sell well. Sony could have, and should have, capitilised on Insomniac when they had Spyro and Crash, then this claim may have had some (whimsical) basis... Finally, more Nintendo IPs- Animal Crossing, Pikmin, The Last Story, Wii__Series, Kirby's Epic Yarn (It's a new IP goddamit!), Luigi's Mansion in the past 10 years, that's all I can think of ATM. But it's not 'just' Pikmin, far from it. This article contains too much foresight and bias for my liking. I thought this is exactly the type of article the site was trying to clamp down on...good read though. But then again, the News Of The World was as well...
I thought this article was going to be about how people are soon going to start calling on SCE to go third party. Instead, it's even less interesting.
Oh dear, the author of this article must be feeling a bit retarded right now. Lets have a closer look at Sony's franchises for one minute, GT5: the worse of the GT games imo, certainly the least fun, the menu system and game structure suck. Uncharted series: My favourite of all Sony's franchise games, quite possibly the defining game of this gen for Sony. LBP: probably doesn't receive the recognition it deserves but there you go, brand new IP doesn't mean instant global domination. If fanboys like the author of this article work and are aloud to publish trash like this, how can I trust anything I read on VGChartz.
Sounds like this guy has only ever played PlayStation and doesn't know anything about other consoles or the games on them.
LOL! Is this a joke article? None of Sony first party franchises have sold at the level of Nintendo mascots. What's the closest? GT?? Yea, that's a beloved mascot right there!
Oh and I would also add, if Sony wants to become "the next nintendo" whatever that means, they have to get grandmas and toddlers to play their games, and I don't think grandma is going to be into Killzone, but that's just my take..
Im sorry but no. Sony is DEFINETLY NOT even near becoming the """""Next Nintendo"""" it has a really really loooong way yet to achieve half of what nintendo has created. Mostof the game titltesmentioned in this artcle are not that groundbreaking as the nintendo mascots, for me sony's first party games are just sad attempts tryin to get into nintendo's levels, if u say that nintendo is only milking old franchises, well i guess that's something to be proud of, franchises that are as old a zelda and continue to sell millions tells u that u have created an actually original, fun and entertaining game that will prevail for years, i really doubt that a game like heavy rain will persist over the next 15 years just as nintendo did with mario
Lets see if sony are still this 'original' when they've been in the industry as long as nintendo. For all we know we might still be playing Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, Uncharted and God of War in 2020 the same way we're still playing with Mario, Zelda, Metroid and Donkey Kong on nintendo in 2011
Thing is... a lot of SONY's older IP we don't even seed any more. The ones you just mentioned have been around since only the PS2, and one of them we haven't seen anything for except a handheld sequal that wasn't from the original developer (Jak and Daxter). Another has supposedly ended with the 3rd game in the series (God of War). Though there are rumors of a 4th. Most of SONY's PS1 franchises haven't seen the light of day this gen.
A few that I could mention:
MediEvil is finally getting a new game but it's not really even a full blown core game. (MediEvil Moves)
Ape Escape got a believe a few games on the PSP (at least one that I know of) and that's it. It's not supposedly and finally getting two new games. One of which is only a 20$ PSN game for the move though.
Syphon Filter is only being kept alive by the PSP. Literally.
The only game coming back full blast from the PS1 era will be Twisted Metal. The last one we got was from 2001 on the PS2. It's been ten years now.
How many of Nintendo's biggest IP's from the NES era still get new games? A that's a pretty decent precentage in my opinion.
- -2
Sony hasn't yet found it's killer genre. Nintendo's killer genre is the 2d platformer. Microsoft owned the FPS genre with Halo. Yes CoD has usurped Halo sale's wise, but FPS games are guaranteed to sell best on Xbox platforms. Sony need to find that killer genre which is not FPS and not 2-d (pr even 3D) platforming. Gran Turismo is the premier non-kart driving game. But it seems to now lack the universal appeal to drive sales in the Americas or Japan. And outside of GT where are the racer sales? It's tell that the next biggest non-kart driving franchise is Forza. Clearly the market's been split. I'd love to think the cinematic action/shooter/platformer genre epitomised by the unmatched Uncharted franchise could be Sony's killer genre. But is drake the iconic character to do it. It is telling to me that Naughty Dog has delivered the iconic character for all 3 of Playstation's generations. Though arguably Ratchet was almost as iconic as Jak. The shame of it is that Naughty Dog has not carried these characters forward from one generation to the next.
"The shame of it is that Naughty Dog has not carried these characters forward from one generation to the next."
And the reason for this is diminishing sales after each new release. Uncharted has reverted that trend so far and there might be a chance we'll see it on Sony's next gen console.
- 0
Is this article serious? The author of this article seems to like Sony very much and ignore the new Nintendo IPs for some reason. :) Sony has some IPs but none of them has nearly the impact as the Nintendo IPs. Come on ... Ratchet and Clank, Shadow of Colossus, Resistance etc.? These games are perhaps recognized by some playstation3 gamers (and even not all of that) but not widely known. Nintendo introduced some new IPs in the last years that are on par (perhaps better) with these Sony IPs in the perception of the public, like Xenoblade, The Last Story, Pandoras Tower, Disaster: Day of Crisis, Eternal Darkness etc. The article formulates some wishful thinking. I hope really it is not meant serious but some very late april fool's joke.
Mario remains the king of games forever. There is no game in the world that has a impact like Mario. It is true that Nintendo is watering it down with to many games and do need to slow up. It's also a console that survived without 3rd party support. Nintendo has stood the test of time and there is no way that Sony can be the next Nintendo.
props to the editor for having the stones to even say this, true or not. He must know that he will open up a crap storm of hate from the Ninty fanboys/girls. Dont agree with everything he said, and not for nothing the PS1&2 did kick the holy crap out of all competitors, and it wasnt cause of 1st party support. Sony is trying but they have years and years to catch up on Ninty if ever. Sackboy, Cole and Helghast wont be as popular as Mario & Zelda, no way
Except that he doesn't bring any argument except: "Sony has 1st party games" and "tries to create awareness about it, because nobody knows really much about them".
- +4
I can see how much of this stirred up some flaming, but some of it I agree with. As far as games I want to play, it is Sony that's bringing it in large amounts. That's not to say anything Nintendo is doing is bad per se, it just isn't for me right now. Microsoft also is lacking in the new IP arena (although, the 360 still offers more content to keep me going than the Wii has this gen). In the end, as long as Sony keeps up their current performance while being affordable and consistent, I think they'll be fine. Are they "the next Nintendo", not necessarily, but they don't have to be as their strategy is different.
Wow, VGC has really hopped on Sony's dick haven't they? Tisk tisk... Sony will never be Nintendo... I have yet to see a single innovation come out of that company's gaming division this gen besides the ability to use 7 controllers at once, which very few games support, and built-in rechargeable batteries. I would love to hear one other thing that they didn't rip straight off. Just one.
Horrible Grammar, baseless assumptions, fanboy drivel smh how did this article get approved?
Sony has definately put lots of new IPs on the map, but I think it is a bit different for Nintendo. It is not fair to just talk about the Mario-franchise. Mario Party is completely different to Mario Galaxy. Sure, they would´nt have sould Millions of copies without the Mario tag on them, but these are kind of new IPs nonetheless.
Sony has definately put lots of new IPs on the map, but I think it is a bit different for Nintendo. It is not fair to just talk about the Mario-franchise. Mario Party is completely different to Mario Galaxy. Sure, they would´nt have sould Millions of copies without the Mario tag on them, but these are kind of new IPs nonetheless.
For Sony to become the next Nintendo, they would have to be so amazing as to survive a Gamcube/GBA-like drought all by themselves and come back a generation later and be market leaders. That's brand power. Pokemon anybody?
For Sony to become the next Nintendo, they would have to be so amazing as to survive a Gamcube/GBA-like drought all by themselves and come back a generation later and be market leaders. That's brand power. Pokemon anybody?
Normally would post something huge, but I see most people have already covered it. Well I admire the writer for at least attempting to be reasonable, this article is clearly biased and wishful thinking. Although not to bash Sony, they have released great games in the past decade, but I think it's ludicrous to say Nitnendo has abandoned all it's first part titles, when that is for the most part, just a blatent lie.
Wow what a joke, i mean back in the 16-bit era, we all turned to the SNES for quality SHMUPs. Or how about the fact that the the N64 with its 200 or so games had a vastly superior library to the PSone, i mean well all know that each and everyone one of those 200 titles were AAA...
Poorly researched, poorly thought out and poorly written. I won't deny Sony's first party efforts have come a long way in the last decade quality wise, but in over all first party strength, innovation and brand awareness, they still play second fiddle to Nintendo.
Writing this article seemed a little bit risky. I do agree with Sony pushing out these great new IP's but Sony the nest Nintendo, i think not.
Sony has great games, but none of them are as recognizable or as beloved as Nintendo's franchises. Even Microsoft's Halo series is more widely recognizable than Sony's most popular games like Uncharted or God of War. Just because Nintendo isn't bring a few JRPGs to North America it doesn't mean Sony is automatically get's default win. The Wii is getting a new Zelda game this year and Sony doesn't have a single game in their entire library that can compete with the level of nostalgia that the Zelda franchise commands. Nintendo has shifted focus to the 3DS as a stop gap to the Wii U. That's sound business. They have moved game development over to the Wii so it's launch lineup won't be as bad as the PS3's was. When someone says "Nintendo" there are so many internationally recognized characters hat come to mind, yet Sony doesn't really have that kind of iconic association. Gran Turismo, God of War, etc may be popular within the Sony fanbase, but even non-gamers are as likely to know who Mario is as they are to know who Mickey Mouse is. If Microsoft or Sony bought Sega, then maybe they could gain history, and characters they'd need to compete with Nintendo's library, but that's not going to happen. If I was Microsoft I'd take Rare off of Kinect duties and let them do for Xbox what they did for N64. If I was Sony I'd do the same with some of the more family friendly franchises. Neither company seems interested in doing that though and that's why Nintendo will always be unstoppable, at list in my opinion.
That's why I got a PS3, cuz Nintendo isn't satisfying me anymore. But I have faith that Nintendo will come back, I'm just not quite sure if the Wii U is the right direction.
I personally never got into Sony titles.. I'm not into those cinema-heavy games they seem to be in love with. But to each his own..
Well Sony is improving but it still got to learn that they shouldn't let go on some of thier strong brands. And they should really market the ones that sell good. Like GT, Uncharted, God of War e.t.c.
I'm not going to argue about how well Sony has or has not achieved this ''creating a nintendo-like family of recognizable characters'' and or whatever else they are trying to do, but I agree with the writer, they're making a good effort and I've noticed it too. A sony Smash Bros isn't too far-fetched now. Also, I'm a metroid fan today because I had seen Samus in Smash Bros.
Lets just look at numbers from Nintendo for this gen, and someone show me that Sony is becoming the new nintendo. New and Re-imagined Franchises: Wii Sports/Play - 131.5 million Wii Fit - 42.31 million New Super Mario Bros - 49.62 million Mario Galaxy - 15.88 million (also the highest rated franchise this generation according to gamerankings) Nintendogs - 24.68 million Brain Age - 45.03 million Professor Layton - 11.31 million Old Franchises: Pokemon - 65.62 million Mario Kart - 49.14 million Zelda - 14.5 million Mario 9.14 million Mario Party 15.65 million Now where are Sony's numbers this gen, and how are they becoming the new Nintendo with them? It takes more than simply making new franchises to become successful like Nintendo, a company needs to have franchises and mascots lasting decades, which sell tens of millions, and hundreds of millions.
Fail article, Sony is close to the quality of Nintendo? Never considering they only have Uncharted, God of War and Gran Turismo as big IPs. Plus mentioning Killzone and Resistance wich some terrible shooters.
I thought at first this had been written by Pachter, but it's a very good impression. Let me start out by saying I own a PS2, a Wii, a DS and a 360. However I feel no desire for a PS3 for reasons I will get to soon. This article is nothing short of either delusional or a troll fest and it's articles like these and recent "joke" articles that leave me looking for other sites to get real gaming news from. The author is clearly an angry boy who wants Xenoblade and friends released in the US and is using that anger to try to promote Sony over Nintendo with the localization issues being Nintendo caring less about their fanbase as a thin veil. To add to someone else's brush with Nintendo's customer service department, my Gamecube was cutting out and we took it to the service centre. Not only did they find and fix the issue, they gave me 2 Nintendo mugs, 3 issues of Nintendo magazine and a level 1 shiny Zigzagoon with a rare OP'd berry. Free. Sony charges just to open it up. Sony becoming known for first party titles and exclusives? They are known at the moment for PSN being completely unreliable. There are a handful of exclusives I can think of that are good, and how many first party titles and exclusives do Nintendo have? The Wii RUNS on first party exclusives. Which could have been used as a downside if the author had actually done any research on his targets. Pikmin? That's really it? And how can you call a character an IP if they appear in one, maybe two games and then vanish? It's absurd. First party titles for the Wii only being Wii Sports and Wii play? Go look at the games list. Metroid, Zelda, too many Mario games I'll admit. Sony is not ahead of Microsoft, as much as it pains me to say that. Yes you have to pay for online but it works. Microsoft is doing what it needs to do, and that is focus on being a gaming console, not some overpriced multimedia player. Playstation Move Heroes is Sony saying "Hey guys, we cloned the Wii's controls, why not clone a couple games too? Let's have a whack at SSBB shall we?" Innovation is not Sony's strong point. Never has been. But previously they've been able to keep things going by taking old concepts and giving them a quality in them that was missing before. Now they are lazy, they rested on their laurels after the PS2, thinking they had this gen in the bag from sheer and utter loyalty, but Microsoft and Nintendo have advanced and Sony hasn't bothered catching up. Microsoft also has a better marketing scheme than Sony's LBP strategy through the Avatar marketplace. So many outfits from so many games in there, it's impossible not to get curious about a large amount of them. Are you really concluding that Nintendo does not deliver a high quality of first party games? You are deluded. The best games on the PS2 were developed by Level 5, and every single Gen Nintendo has dominated with their first party titles more than any other. Pick a gen, think of a game and it will be a Nintendo title. Your article is nothing more than a fanboy muse and it's quite a sad one at that. PS4 will likely be Sony's last home console, which is a shame, but they've shot themselves in the foot by trying to cling to the handheld market and not focusing on what they actually used to do best. Unless they scrap the handheld idea after Vita, I don't see Sony lasting at all. As it is I predict Gen VIII being purely WiiU vs 720.
Well... I know the responses to this article are gonna get crazy but when thing he may have not said in the right way but is undeniably true: SONY releases more core NEW IP's each gen than anyone else. That's not including party games are spin-offs from other franchises. And SONY always gives them as much attention as any of their other IPs. It's nice to know that you can expect to hear about something new every now and again from SONY.
"SONY releases more core NEW IP's each gen than anyone else."
Even if it's true, how does that make Sony the new Nintendo since that's the title of the article?
- +1
WOW! I've never seen an article on this site get so many negative comments before!
Nintendo All-Star Dairantou Smash Brothers Nintendo NUS-NALJ 01/21/99 JP Time to get an editor/fact- checker, VGC. God forbid I list all of the other new IPs mentioned by everyone else. There's simply no excuse for putting up an article based off of such an ignorant point of view, whether its the writer's own opinion or not.
Erhm... sorry but this is a true site, or just some blog insinde IGN.COM? LMAO LOL hahushA no one can be the NEXT Nintendo, cuz Nintendo still here today, and it is ready for tomorrow.
True story. Nintendo of America sucks. They continually ignore fan request for those three games among others and build their brand as a gaming company for the casuals. Even Namco cracked under fan pressure and gave the Tales series a second chance, but NoA is as ignorant as their boss Reggie. With luck, this fan fallout gets Reggie fired cuz at this point, the talk of Wii U focusing on the core gamers again is making a lot of people sick.
Mr Khan, you did touch on the problem Sony has. The problem is now is the industry is more mature, and new IP doesn't have the same impact that old IP does. It is because there is a lot more noise. End result also is, while the IP has some fans, it doesn't even sell huge numbers either. What is the future of the Killzone franchise also, for example? If Sony is luck, they will be Dreamworks, while Nintendo remains Disney.
The Truth is the task of introducing new IPs is not the sole domain of the platform holder. This is now a complimentary task undertaken by platform holders and third parties. The most recogniseable IPs that have come about during this generation have actually been third party and avaialble to all platforms.
Something unexpected surprise Hello. My friend the good shopping place please input our website {w w w }{jordanforworld}{com} YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!! thank you!!! {w w w }{jordanforworld}{com} Believe you will love it. {w w w }{jordanforworld}{com}
Thank god I preffer to play new IPs, or small franchises that spin 2 to 4 games and them i get another. And this is the reason I started playing in a Atari, jumped to Genesis, than PS and stayed there... I don't want to play Mario and all their spin-offs for 20 years... but it's undeniable that Nintendo have sucess with their franchises. I don't need Sony to be sucesfull or equal to Nintendo to like it, i even preffer they keep up this way, and with 3party support so i can have different games to play whenever I want. And people should respect others opinion a little more as we see 95% of the quotes are really bashing the writer. If you want someone to respect your beloved Nintendo or your opinion respect others opinions and tastes.
Someone needed to think this through before posting this article. This guy is talking about milking franchises, his comment on his name tag says he's more excited for battlefield 3 than he should be. The 3rd installment of game thats changed so much from the previous version. He probably plays every call of duy. At least mario's changed since his first game.
Do 'New' ip's count when they're not even slightly original concepts? I mean, c'mon, LBP??? SACKBOY??? (gee I wonder where the inspiration came for THAT game!)... GOD of WAR was a great 'original' game but I enjoyed it more when it was released a few years earlier under the name of 'DEVIL MAY CRY'...obviously the clown who wrote this article thinks sony are the bees knees. I don't mind them myself and own a ps3 but their 1st party releases suck and I tend to go for the multi platform stuff...oh and nintendo games, of course.
If you're really going to look at it that why, you should address some of the replies here stating NindenDogs and (This one baffles me) New Super Mario Bros. are new IPs...
- -1
SMK outsells all of Sony's 1st party games combined, so this article is horrible at best.
153 Comments