Sony: Microsoft is reliant on Shooters

[BatOtaku13]

yeah they're pretty much right. name one microsoft exclusive game that a generally large percentage of owners are excited about that isn't a shooter.

 

[RowdyRodimus]

Sony's just pissed that so far they've made this generations Shenmue with Heavy Rain, at least according to attach rates. Actually, considering there are over 3 times the number of PS3's sold compared to Dreamcasts 10.6 million, the attach rate for Heavy Rain is pathetic compared to the flop that was Shenmue.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Sony has been and still is overly focused on the JRPGs

Sony don't really make RPGs unless you count the MMOs from SOE. Their Japanese studios are Polyphony Digital and Team ICO.

 

[Dragonforce525]

And Sony is reliant on the success of it's previous console's games.

 

[slipknot4]

Whilst the links information was useless and kind of obvious the comments below wore... creepy to say at least. I thought we had put the fanboy era behind us... I guess I've spent too much time at the escapist...

 

[Something Amyss]

And you don't?

EDIT: Sorry, but this seems like the pot calling the kettle black to me.

Not to the same extent.

Anyway, they do it because it works.

 

[Ertol]

That just blew my mind... I would have never guessed.

But seriously...most games these days are shooters, or are RPG games that have FPS combat. That's just where everybody is at during this gen I guess. Personally I prefer the fantasy sword and magick part of games more, but that's just me.

Microsoft's big titles are shooter, but those generally sell so I guess people still want FPS games. There are some RPG games out there, though I have to say I probably play more PS2 and Xbox games then I do the newer gen. Other then MGS4 and Demon's Souls (when I'm ready to break another controller), nothing on either conosle has really been incrediable.

 

[Altorin]

I thought consoles were reliant on 12 year olds with twitch reflexes and their parent's disposable income?

that sort of attitude (even in jest) is actually really detrimental to the gaming industry, as it's about the opposite of what is actually true, but it's what everyone believes

It's not like most intelligent adults would pay for Xbox Live Gold themselves, so that money has to be coming from the kids' parents.

ugh. find a diving board at the edge of a cliff.

 

[Azaraxzealot]

...and the PS3 relies on JRPG knockoffs of Final Fantasy... so what?

 

[VanityGirl]

And the PS3 isn't?

Everything is shooter-centric these days on 360, PC, and PS3.

Third or first person, shooters are the norm!

Agreed.
Most PS3 and 360 games as of later have been shooter based. My last few PS3 and 360 purchases have been shooters. *sigh*

MAG, SOCOM, MW2, Halo:Reach
Where's my RPG's at?!

 

[rockyoumonkeys]

Wow, this console war is getting really petty. They should spend more time focused on their own product, less on the competitor's.

It's hard to say that Sony's "miles behind" when the only exclusive shooters MS has, off the top of my head, are Halo and Gears of War, neither of which I'm all that impressed by. Meanwhile, Sony has exclusives like Killzone, Resistance, Ratchet and Clank, and Uncharted, all of which are, at least on some level, "shooters".

Pretty stupid argument from Sony.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

And you don't?

EDIT: Sorry, but this seems like the pot calling the kettle black to me.

Not to the same extent.

Anyway, they do it because it works.

Meh, still seems like the pot calling the kettle black to me. Open mouth insert foot Sony.

 

[Something Amyss]

Meh, still seems like the pot calling the kettle black to me. Open mouth insert foot Sony.

It's marketing. Even when not running an ad campaign, it's still marketing. It also doesn't hurt that they have more "big" franchises that aren't shooters, while Microsoft has a lot of brown shooters with chest high walls, but the truth is really irrelevant to marketing.

 

[scnj]

Meh, still seems like the pot calling the kettle black to me. Open mouth insert foot Sony.

It's marketing. Even when not running an ad campaign, it's still marketing. It also doesn't hurt that they have more "big" franchises that aren't shooters, while Microsoft has a lot of brown shooters with chest high walls, but the truth is really irrelevant to marketing.

Wouldn't they be better off positively promoting their own products [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/video-games/7999747/Halo-Spartan-in-jetpack-flies-around-Trafalgar-Square.html] rather than attempting (and failing) to insult another company's?

 

[migo]

And Sony is reliant on the success of it's previous console's games.

Touché

(ouch)

 

[Sinclair Solutions]

And the point of this release is...what? To insult the other company? Does that bring over new fans or something?

 

[migo]

If you like shooters you get a 360, if you like Jrpg's you get a playstation. Doesn't everyone already know that?

I bought a 360 for JRPG's. Final Fantasy XIII coming to the 360 was the final selling point. Now, I use my 360 for Netflix, nothing more. Why? Because all that ever comes out is fuckin' shooters which I have never liked. Wish I had bought the PS3 now.

I don't remember JRPG's being the popular genre last gen, nope, last gen it was also shooters and the XBOX was full of them. It's the reason why the 360 is full of them, because they were king last gen. The only reason the 360 even has JRPG's on it is to promote console sales in Japan, which failed.

Don't feel bad, when you bought your 360 and it had the JRPGs, the PS3 was retardedly expensive and had no games. Now it's massively come down in price, so your 360 then plus your PS3 now is about the same cost as just buying a PS3 then.