Cloud gaming will be interesting because I think overall the Telco's have an advantage in distribution but not content or experience. Delivery points closer to the last mile are going to provide the best quality streams. Their own services may never take off and a partnership with onlive, microsoft, or sony may not materialize but the owners of copper and fibre have competitive advantage in gaming steam quality. The ISP is the company that can deliver a picture with less compression and the lowest input latency. They may even manage traffic outside and inside the house without antitrust issues for an even larger advantage.
Is Sony's corporate culture in the right place to ensure PS4 is a success?
- Thread starter DeaconKnowledge
- Start date
DeaconKnowledge
Member
You know, i've often thought that Sony would transition in this space, but so far this has also been an initiative in which Sony was late. Namely in the music space with iTunes (Sony Connect was basically stillborn).
None of the console developers have really managed to leverage this, so perhaps this is the opportunity Sony needs.
I suspect next gen we'll see Sony go more the way of MS did this gen. Close up larger first party studios in favor of leverage third party studios and software, then spawn some smaller first party studios to handle digital games for profit. I also think Sony is going to try their best to get a subscription service on par with Live, like really on par. Problem is, MS isn't the MS of 2005. Now they have Windows Phone 8, Windows 8, Surface all the Live services like Xbox Music, Video, Skype, on and on and on and it will all certainly be seemless and tied into the next gen Xbox. So next gen PSN honestly IMO stands zero chance of being able to stand up to Live head to head feature wise.. Sony just doesn't have the ecosystem, the money, the manpower nor the technical software prowess to compete head to head with MS in 2013 and beyond.
They need to instead not follow the subscript model MS has in place. To be competitive they need to continue with free route as much as possible and just strengthen the infrastructure they have in place. Unify services and set real standards for all games like MS did in 2005. Do that and I would think its a success on PSN.. but theres only one big problem there. If MS decides they want to absolutely crush PSN and Sony by removing the pay wall on Live Gold, make Gold free and introduce a higher tier premium subscription service to replace it.. Live Platinum.
If Live goes free in most regards.. of some fashion, Sony is in a heap of trouble. But they have their strong first party library. They should leverage that, and continue to making exceptional hardware. The thing is, its not the 90s any longer and neither either or both of those will cut it in this day and age. Consumers expect MORE from their electronics these days... entire ecosystem integration and a real value for their cash money. A next gen device that is simply an upgraded console with better services is dead in the water. Tablets and smartphones are already catching up quickly and this next gen may possibly be the very last true 'console' generation, as future gens may go 100% mobile and allow for wireless streaming of games to newer televisions etc... or you just dock your console/handheld with the TV.
So its game time for Sony, make it or break it. If they continue to go head to head with MS, they have to change their game in order to compete. They need some serious brains at the helm to innovate new software alliances between existing services.. like Google or something to really Wow consumers. I dont think Sony has the ecosystem to do it themselves, they're going to need to buy into someone elses services.. and is that a gamble Sony is willing to take?
edit. In regards to cloud gaming? Both MS and Sony will have some variant of it next gen. Sony again bought their way into it, whereas MS has been in the cloud since the early 90s with terminal server type protocols, and most recently their Azure product development. I suspect at least on the MS side they'll make all game trials 100% streamed. Want to try this game out before buying? Click Try and and it starts in 10 seconds. Maybe even a full fledged game rental service that is streaming, perhaps part of the Live Platinum subscription. Sony? Not sure what they've got brewing but I suspect it will be something similar, just feel not as integrated into PSN, perhaps shoe horned in.
They need to instead not follow the subscript model MS has in place. To be competitive they need to continue with free route as much as possible and just strengthen the infrastructure they have in place. Unify services and set real standards for all games like MS did in 2005. Do that and I would think its a success on PSN.. but theres only one big problem there. If MS decides they want to absolutely crush PSN and Sony by removing the pay wall on Live Gold, make Gold free and introduce a higher tier premium subscription service to replace it.. Live Platinum.
If Live goes free in most regards.. of some fashion, Sony is in a heap of trouble. But they have their strong first party library. They should leverage that, and continue to making exceptional hardware. The thing is, its not the 90s any longer and neither either or both of those will cut it in this day and age. Consumers expect MORE from their electronics these days... entire ecosystem integration and a real value for their cash money. A next gen device that is simply an upgraded console with better services is dead in the water. Tablets and smartphones are already catching up quickly and this next gen may possibly be the very last true 'console' generation, as future gens may go 100% mobile and allow for wireless streaming of games to newer televisions etc... or you just dock your console/handheld with the TV.
So its game time for Sony, make it or break it. If they continue to go head to head with MS, they have to change their game in order to compete. They need some serious brains at the helm to innovate new software alliances between existing services.. like Google or something to really Wow consumers. I dont think Sony has the ecosystem to do it themselves, they're going to need to buy into someone elses services.. and is that a gamble Sony is willing to take?
edit. In regards to cloud gaming? Both MS and Sony will have some variant of it next gen. Sony again bought their way into it, whereas MS has been in the cloud since the early 90s with terminal server type protocols, and most recently their Azure product development. I suspect at least on the MS side they'll make all game trials 100% streamed. Want to try this game out before buying? Click Try and and it starts in 10 seconds. Maybe even a full fledged game rental service that is streaming, perhaps part of the Live Platinum subscription. Sony? Not sure what they've got brewing but I suspect it will be something similar, just feel not as integrated into PSN, perhaps shoe horned in.
naahhh
they will be around for a long time
but if they kee going like this I'm sure they will learn their lesson the hard way
Canis lupus
Member
Vita has off the shelf parts, if they go the same route and not produce and pump billions in chips like Cell they'd have learned their lessons.
gundamkyoukai
Member
Are you being serious there UC , GOW , Infamous and few others that are for both the hardcore and casual .
You name 1 big Sony IP and forget about the rest ?
I think Kaz is doing good so far , Vita is a good system but there is no market for handhelds anymore.
Don't think they should have brought out Vita in the first place but the did not want Nintendo have most of the Japanese market for there self .
That still looks to be happening anyway but home consoles are not the same .
For PS4 all they have to it match or get close to MS in price , power , make there system easy to develop for and make sure they have good line up of first party games.
While talking about there own strong points like free online , cloud gaming ect ect .
I expect them to also put even more into first party games .
No, they won't.
They already are going the hard way.
http://www.notenoughshaders.com/2012/09/08/the-ten-year-decline-of-sony/
If PS4 is powerful enough to match nextbox exactly if not better in multi-plats and also give PD the resources to get GT6 out then they will have me day 1.
I would love vita in hit a yearly release like the iphone range, beef up the specs each year but make it able to run all games.
As much as I love my xbox, I only need it for halo and live arcade, nothing else.
I would love vita in hit a yearly release like the iphone range, beef up the specs each year but make it able to run all games.
As much as I love my xbox, I only need it for halo and live arcade, nothing else.
Vita is a very tricky subject. Tech it had everything going for it
Cheap Parts
Price was lower then expected (I remember people actually cheering at E3 for the price alone being low lol)
Had Uncharted, even if it isn't a big system mover it's still a heavy weight title
The fact of the matter is the handheld market has changed...alot especially since the introduction of iOS and phone gaming. Just because Nintendo has a niche in handhelds (Which for years was uncontested until psp) doesn't mean Sony would also. It didn't help that they moved the launch to the spring time when the holidays would have given it a better start.
Cheap Parts
Price was lower then expected (I remember people actually cheering at E3 for the price alone being low lol)
Had Uncharted, even if it isn't a big system mover it's still a heavy weight title
The fact of the matter is the handheld market has changed...alot especially since the introduction of iOS and phone gaming. Just because Nintendo has a niche in handhelds (Which for years was uncontested until psp) doesn't mean Sony would also. It didn't help that they moved the launch to the spring time when the holidays would have given it a better start.
CadetMahoney
Member
Indeed, MS sure played the wrong hand this gen, exclusives aren't doing it anymore. If they concentrated on 1st party exclusives they wouldn't be in the problem they're in.
SCE lacks identity when it comes to their franchises. Sackboy and Nathan Drake just don't cut it, not like Crash and Lara Croft did in the late 90s. Sony were too much of a hardware company back then, and now they've caught on that content is king, it's too little too late.
Not quite sure how people can cite the Vita as proof that Sony wont fully back the PS4 to ensure its success.
One of the reasons the Vita is failing is because Sony is ignoring it in favor of the PS3.
So, do you think that once the PS4 is out that Sony will ignore it in favor of the Vita?
No way.
The Vita will be completely forgotten by Sony when the PS4 is released. Same thing happened with the PSP when the PS3 was released.
Even if Sony adopts some kind of "me too" or "also ran" philosophy with the PS4 at least they'll be doing something with it.
One of the reasons the Vita is failing is because Sony is ignoring it in favor of the PS3.
So, do you think that once the PS4 is out that Sony will ignore it in favor of the Vita?
No way.
The Vita will be completely forgotten by Sony when the PS4 is released. Same thing happened with the PSP when the PS3 was released.
Even if Sony adopts some kind of "me too" or "also ran" philosophy with the PS4 at least they'll be doing something with it.
GraveRobberX
Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
This is before we found out the price gouging that was for the proprietary Memory Cards
That price is forgotten by most
4GB stick for $20, come the fuck on
The top tier stick is 32GB and cost an extra $100, so roughly your Vita has ballooned to $350, the price of a fucking WiiU and that is with-out a game
No it didn't. PSP sold well for a while and had a lot of software after the PS3 release. Support fell though 2008-2009 because of CFW and Western titles being ill suited to the platform controls, something Sony fixed with the Vita.
True memory card prices did slow down it's momentum.
PopcornMegaphone
Banned
FrozenCell
Member
no, just like Nintendo they're still stuck in last millenium by discriminating customers based on region:
- "you can't buy this english / japanese language game because you live in europe where it is not 'published', doesn't matter if it's digital"
- "although it's the exact same hardware spec, your european NEX camera is software limited to 50fps video recording compared to the 60fps for the rest of the world"
got plenty of ideas how PS4 could be wonderful, but the way things are going, they're lucky to reach current gen sales.
- "you can't buy this english / japanese language game because you live in europe where it is not 'published', doesn't matter if it's digital"
- "although it's the exact same hardware spec, your european NEX camera is software limited to 50fps video recording compared to the 60fps for the rest of the world"
got plenty of ideas how PS4 could be wonderful, but the way things are going, they're lucky to reach current gen sales.
Gears may not blow everything else away in numbers but it did influence a whole generation of third person shooters. Halo influenced a whole generation of console first person shooters. None of Sony's first party IPs have done that this generation. You could make the argument that God of War influenced a generation of western hack n' slash games (after Devil May Cry), and that Gran Turismo is indeed still a mass-selling exclusive franchise, but that's about it, and would matter more if Polyphony actually released more than one console GT game this gen. Someone else in this thread already noted how Halo alone outsells several of Sony's first party IPs combined, that's the result. Despite being innovative, LBP and Heavy Rain still haven't sold PS3s in the same capacity in which Halo has sold Xboxes.
Plus, in my opinion exclusive games actually become less relevant this gen. I'm still not convinced all of Sony's new IPs this gen sold many PS3s (at least not in the same way as Microsoft's exclusives), and the most important way in which Microsoft has lead is Xbox Live. Outside of exclusives, so many people preferred the Xbox versions of multiplatform games because they want to play those games while plugged into Live. Sony spent this gen playing catch-up with PSN, which a lot of people are still convinced is inferior. I think of Sony wants to beat Microsoft next gen - that's the area in which they need to work the hardest, and something is gonna have to happen to their corporate culture before they can really make progress.
Everybody does that man. Media companies in general don't want people importing, never mind the fact that we even still have multiple currencies to deal with.
Canis lupus
Member
If people don't buy PS3 for exclusives and people prefer 360 for multiplats why do you think people buy PS3s?
GraveRobberX
Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
People forget that 1GB PSP memory sticks were 125 once upon a time.
Oh so that excuses Sony for it's incompetence, Gotcha!
My NES cost me $300!
ZOMG!
As a blu-ray player?
Evolution_1ne
Banned
lol
FrozenCell
Member
Those media companies are also stuck in the last millenium... wait, my brain can't even process this part: "don't want people importing" in an age where their 1s and 0s are being shared before physical copies reach retail.
Well I honestly can't talk for North America, but for starters there's Japan where Microsoft has no presence and the PS3 still get's some major exclusives like Final Fantasy and such. Also there's Europe, where I understand Xbox Live isn't supported nearly as well and Sony promotes its brand much more strongly than Microsoft does.
That's why I bought one originally.
gundamkyoukai
Member
I would say that UC 2 had just as much influenced as Gears not to mention MS does not even own the Gears IP.
GT also out sell several of MS IP the problem is they don't bring out as much games as Sony does .
Yes GT does not sell as good as before and halo out sells it .
Still Sony has as much big IP as MS does but also some smaller ones that don't sell to bad .
So you think that people bought MS systems for Gear , Halo , etc etc but don't think people bought a PS3 to play GOW , GT , UC that makes no sense .
Also they are many reason why people buy multiplatform games on Xbox over PS3 the reason is not live alone.
Back early days most games were better on 360 is just another eg .
Agent X
Member
Excellent points. I think it's stupid for people to gripe about the "B team" or whatnot. The end result is what matters.
It's clear that certain development groups are comfortable with working on a particular platform, and/or have demonstrated a proficiency on that platform. If everyone can easily recognize where these studios' crafts are best applied, then why should Sony reshuffle studios away from their area of expertise, just to satisfy the whims of a few whiny people posting on Internet forums?
Pulling Naughty Dog off of PS3 projects (say goodbye to The Last of Us) won't automatically result in better Vita games, and taking Bend Studio off of Vita won't automatically result in better PS3 games. Some people just don't think this through.
I don't think there's a problem with the Vita's design. I do think they made some serious blunders in marketing, as well as managing the software schedule.
For example, they should've delayed a couple of the Vita's launch titles (good example being ModNation Racers: Road Trip) by at least two months. This would've accomplished two things:
1. The quality of those games would have been better with a couple extra months of development.
2. They could have filled in the large gaps in the schedule that appeared during the spring and summer.
I know some people who were very disheartened when absolutely nothing was released in stores for Vita from mid June until late August. Sure, Vita had some games come out in the PlayStation Store during that time. However, many people don't keep tabs on downloadable game releases, especially people who don't already possess the system and rely on looking at brick-and-mortar store shelves as their primary indicator of software support.
Good point. SCEA's marketing right now is utterly atrocious. I haven't seen a single Vita commercial on TV in about six months. For that matter, I haven't even seen very many PS3 ads in that period, either, although they do have one sponsored ad for Assassin's Creed III that features the system bundle at the end.
My Sunday newspaper today has "toy catalogs" from Walmart and Target. Sony video game products have zero presence in both of these.
Toys "R" Us ad this week has no real Sony presence. A dozen multiplatform games are advertised as being available for "Xbox 360 & PS3"--the Xbox 360 cover is displayed on all twelve of them.
During the entire summer, I figured that Sony's lack of marketing and advertising was just them saving their efforts for a massive autumn push. Well, we're halfway through autumn, and the situation shows no sign of improvement. I'd love to believe it's going to get better, but seeing how Sony just blew off the #1 and #2 retailers in the nation by missing their opportunity to be included in their holiday catalogs this year, I'm rapidly losing hope.
DCharlie
And even i am moderately surprised
you know, i've largely fallen out with MS but this is so wrong i don't even know where to start.
MS release a machine with what should have been crippling hardware issues, "only 2 franchises" and a "weaker than PS3" machine yet they've managed to shove Sony down to third place.
if that's "played the wrong hand" god help everyone else if they get it right.
i'm somewhat concerned that this is going to get stupid at somepoint, with one of the big three going down an IP/online check before you can run anything - which will mean if you are in Japan you play Japanese games in Japanese and if you are in the US you play US games in English and unless you start farting about with IP maskers then you are royally screwed for playing outside your wee box.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
People forget that 1GB PSP memory sticks were 125 once upon a time.
I just used the memory stick from my digital camera in my PSP.
I'd actually say that a majority of the 360's success came from Sony squandering their marketshare though bad decisions. A majority of people buy the 360 because all their friends bought it early on either when the 360 was the only console on the market or when the PS3 was high priced and "had no games".
MrCunningham
Member
The thing is, outside of the early over heating issues that were solved in later revisions. There wasn't much that crippled the 360 hardware at all. I think it is the other way around, the PS3 may have looked impressive on paper back when it was released. But suffered from issues like a non unified RAM pool, a weaker GPU than what you would find in the 360. Microsofts dev tools are generally cited as being better to work with than Sony's dev tools making it a better work environment for third party developers as well. Sure you could point at the Cell processor as being the saving grace of the PS3, but it also had a few downsides to the machine as well. But I don't think there was any clear cut winner when it came to hardware between the PS3/ 360, both had their strengths and weaknesses. But the PS3 was hardly the quantum leap it was originally made out to be.
Overall Microsoft played their cards really well this generation. They had their online infostructure in place since day one, they managed to capture the mainstream gamer crowd while also appealing to the casual gamers with Kinect. they built a really strong brand name this generation with the 360 and managed to put the PS3 in third place in many regions of the world (as you just said).
The only downside to the 360 is the lack of exclusive first party franchises. I think Sony excelled well in harvesting new first and second party developers this gen to create PS3 exclusives. Nintendo has been Nintendo, continuing strong new iterations of all their mainline franchises while throwing out the odd new series. Microsoft dropped the ball on first party software, aside from a few franchises they have.
PopcornMegaphone
Banned
I'd say that's partly true early in this gen, but MS clearly hit a homerun with Kinect. It's pretty clear to me MS has a better pulse of the boarder gaming market right now. I also suspect MS will lead next gen with services outside of gaming which is becoming more and more important.
Also, please don't reply to this post with your gaming tastes. My post is merely market related.
Melchiah
Member
The price tag alone doesn't explain what happened in Europe though, as PS2 was already 500€ at launch in November 2000. In that context 599€ for PS3 didn't seem anything out of the ordinary.
I always thought the games define the system, not the hardware or the control method, and the PS3 certainly hasn't fell short on offering magnificent entertainment you can't find anywhere else. No reason to assume it would be any different with the PS4.
Seems like you deliberately left out two of their strongest franchises by concentrating on shooters.
http://www.polyphony.co.jp/english/list.html
Then there's Sing Star, which captures casual customers pretty well.
Supermanisdead
Member
As long as they can keep up with Microsoft in terms of power and price, they will do fine because of multi-platform games. But I have a feeling MS will go crazy with multimedia integration and probably a tablet screen controller and do whatever they can to get into people's homes (subscriptions, super cheap console options). If MS has a tablet controller, we might actually see more Wii-U downports (or mutliplats depending on how powerful the next Xbox is).
I'm still trying to figure out how Uncharted 2 influenced other games this gen. It's one of the best games this gen but I can't think of anything that it actually pioneered or popularized.
And yes, I would say that more people buy Xboxes for Halo than people buy PS3s for most of Sony's first party IPs. GOW and UC just aren't as popular. GT might be as popular in Europe, but Sony doesn't have anything first party in the last decade that's been as big a hit as Halo. Gears might not be first party, but it is exclusive. I also think Live is the biggest reason why a lot of people chose the Xbox 360 versions of multiplatform games, obviously this goes especially for multiplayer games.
Without a doubt. The next Xbox will be the fourth pillar of Windows 8 alongside their desktop OS, Windows Phone, and Surface Tablet. It will be the set top box portal to Windows 8. Microsoft is probably trying to draw in people to buy it not just to play games, but also to use it as a streaming box or for whatever apps people develop for Windows 8 that you might want to use on your TV screen. They want all those devices integrated through that OS like Apple has all their devices integrated, but the difference is that Apple hasn't made a big move into the living room yet - the next Xbox will be Microsoft's living room portal to W8. Sony has the potential to do this, but won't because they can't get all their divisions to work together towards a single vision.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
You don't lead the market by keeping up with the Jones'.
Boom. That's the whole point of this thread. Most of what Sony has done this gen has just been to keep up with the Joneses, not lead.
Supermanisdead
Member
When your latest system sells 5k a week in Japan, keeping up with the Jones' is shooting for the stars.
Speaking mostly from a sales standpoint and some opinion. None of their first party games are bad, but they just don't sell the way you expect top tier 1st Party games to sell. If they don't make exciting first party games for the PS4 they are going to have problems. Uncharted is the one series you could see being a system seller, but Uncharted 3 for me personally and it seems from a lot of people was not as good as we expected it to be. And Naughty Dog seems to have moved on from the franchise. I am very interested to see how God of War Ascension sells, I wonder if that series has reached the saturation point. Combined with Sony losing all of their big third party exclusives. GTA, FF and Metal Gear, and Microsoft quietly opening up a bunch of 1st party studios in the last 18 months I have a bad feeling the PS4 could be in for a Vita experience game wise. Sony needs to focus their first party money on not throwing stuff at wall, but making a few focused games that are good enough to sell systems. For all of their management problems the decline in quality of their first party stuff is what worries me the most.
And some numbers for why I say their first party sales is disappointing. Numbers in millions from vg chartz
Uncharted Lifetime sales for 1-3: 14.83
Gran Turismo 5: 8.05
Resistance 1-3: 7.63 With a stunning failure of 1.21 for resistance 3
God of War 3: 4.47
Killzone 2-3: 5.23 with Killzone 3 still having sold 500k fewer copies than Killzone
Infamous 1-2: 3.55 With Infamous 2 a million under infamous 1
Mag: 1.25
StarHawk: 0.17
Twisted Metal: 0.56
To put those in perspective for why I call those underwhelming sales for a system exclusive:
Halo 3: 11.62
Halo ODST: 6.09
Halo Reach: 9.23
This generation: 26.94 Million before Halo 4
Gears 1-3: 18.13
Fable 2-3: 8.94
Forza 2-4: 11.59
Core 1st Party Wii:
Super Mario Galaxy 1-2: 17.19
Twilight Princes: 6.61
Skyward Sword: 3.46
Metroid Prime 3: 1.64
Smash Brothers Brawl: 11.25
Donkey Kong Country Returns: 5.67
Melchiah
Member
Journey and The Unfinished Swan aren't good games?
Chuck Norris
Banned
Except Uncharted and God of War sells just as well as Gears in that 5-6 million range. While Gran Turismo is there to push out Halo like numbers.
Then they have a slew of others selling 2 - 4 million which is a success for any title. Like LBP (4.5 million), infamous (~2 million), Killzone (~2 million).
But if you want to throw opinion about disappointments into a discussion, I wouldn't really be doing it while championing Halo
.
Metallix87
Member
Now this is just an absolutely ridiculous argument. The platform shouldn't be referred to as a strength or weakness. You use your strengths and weaknesses to bring the best out of a platform with your ideas. If you really think Naughty Dog can only do great console games and not great handheld games, then that just means they're an untalented lot and completely overrated.
staticneuron
Member
No you were talking mostly from opinion. Because you can scroll up and see GOW sales, GT5 sales, and easily look up the other franchises.
Sony franchises do well, with most selling between 2 and 4 million over their lifetime and for the large amount of titles they created within this generation alone that was a great job.
Really? You think that taking a team away from a design direction they have had for years, their custom engines and tools refined for large assets and a certain amount of power, to just hop on a newer/weaker hardware and make magic out of this?
Games take time to make. And there is alot of work that isn't known to the average consumer. It isn't as easy as flicking the switch and it is highly illogical to take these teams of the direction they have planned and worked for. Given the time windows gamers expect (impatient bunch really) I doubt anything good will come out of that. A situation made worse by reviewers now comparing Vita games to console iterations.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
You know how last E3 "Everything Was Uncharted"? That's how.
I actually feel this endless stream of imitators has somewhat hurt the goodwill on UC games, as now many people seem to see the series as some kind of gaming villain because some of their favorite franchies transformed into Uncharted copycats.
adversesolutions
Member
Not to mention MS completely lost the format war by depending on HD-DVD!
gundamkyoukai
Member
I am try to see your point because MS has not made another IP as big as Halo in the last decade either .
Your talking about Gear but UC and GOW sell just as good not to mention that Sony has big games in allot of genres .
GT was just as big as Halo but it takes longer to get there and sales down thanks to Japan .
In terms of first party Sony problem this gen was bring out games to slow expect for UC .
No body use vg charts on this board so don't try to prove a point with it .
Not to mention thoses number are wrong since UC over 17 million by now.
Chuck Norris
Banned
I think unlike Microsoft, Sony has made the intelligent move of expanding and improving the quality of their studios heading into next gen. I learned at the start of this gen, that anything in the first few years with a smidgen of quality is able to establish a high attach rate. GRAW, Gears, Oblivion on 360 all benefitted from this while on PS3 the likes of Resistance and Motorstorm were the early benefitters.
Unfortunately for Sony, their studios really weren't half as good at the start of the gen as I believe they have become. Sony also had them poorly positioned to deliver content. Some studios like SSM didn't get there for years. I have no insider knowledge, but the hints are that Guerrilla and SSM are working on next gen new IPs. Polyphony have been working on something for two years and if Sony are smart that will be a GT game for the next console. And then there is Naughty Dog. A 2-3 year development cycle after Uncharted 3 would put them n course to deliver a new one. If Sony can push out a couple new IPs and their two biggest franchises in the early stages of 2014 launch they would be well positioned to succeed off of that
Sonys biggest issue, after the initial price factor, was that they lost the mindshare of the consumer and had a bad stigma of PS3 having no games for a long while. Sony needs to be early if possible. And if it's not possible, they need the games that will justify a later release date because they didn't have that last time. I thik that will be accommodated by better and less alien development tools.
If Microsoft don't stop resting on their laurels, they will fall pray to this. Epic seems to be doing their own thing now that the trilogy is sorted, Bungie are off on their own. 343 may get a game but I imagine it will be well after launch seeing as they just released a game. Meanwhile Rare and Lionshead aren't the same companies they once were. I think they need a more expansive effort, otherwise MS could easily fall pray to the "720 got no game" mindshare
It's hard to say what either will do with hardware. But i think Sony is in a very strong position to push forward with a new console right now, if we assume that a consoles success is primarily derived from the games that define it.
Unfortunately for Sony, their studios really weren't half as good at the start of the gen as I believe they have become. Sony also had them poorly positioned to deliver content. Some studios like SSM didn't get there for years. I have no insider knowledge, but the hints are that Guerrilla and SSM are working on next gen new IPs. Polyphony have been working on something for two years and if Sony are smart that will be a GT game for the next console. And then there is Naughty Dog. A 2-3 year development cycle after Uncharted 3 would put them n course to deliver a new one. If Sony can push out a couple new IPs and their two biggest franchises in the early stages of 2014 launch they would be well positioned to succeed off of that
Sonys biggest issue, after the initial price factor, was that they lost the mindshare of the consumer and had a bad stigma of PS3 having no games for a long while. Sony needs to be early if possible. And if it's not possible, they need the games that will justify a later release date because they didn't have that last time. I thik that will be accommodated by better and less alien development tools.
If Microsoft don't stop resting on their laurels, they will fall pray to this. Epic seems to be doing their own thing now that the trilogy is sorted, Bungie are off on their own. 343 may get a game but I imagine it will be well after launch seeing as they just released a game. Meanwhile Rare and Lionshead aren't the same companies they once were. I think they need a more expansive effort, otherwise MS could easily fall pray to the "720 got no game" mindshare
It's hard to say what either will do with hardware. But i think Sony is in a very strong position to push forward with a new console right now, if we assume that a consoles success is primarily derived from the games that define it.