Is Sony losing its publishing moxie?

[FarticusMaximus]

Your mentioned "narrative focussed" games actually have good gameplay AND great narratives to go along with it. That's objectively a popular opinion that the reviews for those games reflect.

'Objectively a popular opinion' is a nonsense statement. Opinion is 100% entirely subjective, regardless of how many or how few share it.

'Good gameplay' and 'narrative focus' are, regardless of whatever metric you care to provide, entirely subjective. To some people even naming the controlled character in a game might be too narrative focussed. To some, having to interact with any object in a game is too gameplay focussed. Extreme examples sure, but no less valid as personal opinions.

So maybe your perception comes from you having more a preference for MS exclusives, rather than anything else.

Come on now, you can do better than resorting to the fanboy card.

 

[iroboto]

I think you're confusing your own personal gameplay preferences for objective fact.

I clocked just as much time in UC2 MP, TLOU MP and ME2 COOP than I did in Destiny, and definintely more than COD (hate COD MP). Still doesn't mean or prove anything.

I'm a pc gamer first and foremost, so to me when I look at games with loops I look at the most popular games being played. Mainly MOBAs followed by MMOS, CounterStrike then COD, Starcraft etc. I don't think I'm being subjective with it.

What you're trying so hard to classify as "gameplay focus" here and "narrative focus" here, doesn't exist in reality except in only the most miniscule of cases (e.g. The Order). All the game you classify as "gameplay focussed" that you mentioned merely have shit story and narrative and next to no characterisation. So it's obvious that the only thing left to leave a lasting impression on the player is the gameplay loop, but that's only because that is literally all there is to those games. Sure the gameplay is great, and has depth, but no more so than the other games mentioned.

the examples provided were just console based. I wanted to avoid using PC games. But MOBAs, CS and Quake do insanely well with no story.

Your mentioned "narrative focussed" games actually have good gameplay AND great narratives to go along with it. That's objectively a popular opinion that the reviews for those games reflect. The only difference is that these games ALSO have good stories to go along with the gameplay and so naturally those stories will leave a lasting impact and can often dominate the subject of discussion around those games. Gamers are humans, and so an emotional connection to a game's story or characters can be more powerful and leave a more lasting impact than the simple fun of a narrative-less gameplay loop.

Agreed which is why it's there. I didn't say this was a bad thing unless in the situation that it didn't have amazing gameplay and a good narrative.

The only games, outside of titles like the Order that clearly don't get the storytelling-gameplay balance right, that I would legitimately call "narrative focussed" are games like Heavy Rain, visual novels and Point & Click Adventures, of which I've always classified HR as a modern equivalent.

For me it's any game in which story or the direction of the game is driven by the plot. Some are more than others however. This definition is I guess unimportant.

There's no more "narrative focus" in Sony's biggest games as any of the other major third party games. The only exception being MS, as since the original Halo, their games tend to end up with pretty shitty narratives. So maybe your perception comes from you having more a preference for MS exclusives, rather than anything else.

. I never brought Halo or MS into this argument ever, that was jay24 - halo is more shooter than narrative. Always has been, the game is more traditional than current shooters that now include slow downs and QTEs. And this is my first year really making console my main gaming device.

On the flip side, there's absolutely no reason to artificially constrain your selection to Sony's biggest AAA games (and even then there are exceptions, e.g. Gran Turismo, Motor Storm, WarHawk etc). Sony publishes lots of different games including ones with big presentation and narrative as well as gameplay, along with other pure gameplay-type games. So I would still strongly contend that Sony has lost it's moxie (whatever that is) because it's only making narrative-focussed games.

And this was my issue with his post. You fell for his straw man argument. If you read my post entirely I did not suggest that Sony lost its moxie for targeting narrative games, but that it had continued focus on it. He managed to basically reform my argument that Sony was only green lighting narrative games made that my argument and attacked that position. They took a risk with the Order just like they did wih heavy rain. It's no different that MS taking a risk with titanfall. Should either be faulted just because they failed to deliver? No. I don't contend that Sony has lost it. It's just doing what it does already.

 

[Sigfried1977]

I dont know what that means,The Puppeteer doesnt play like your typical platformer

It simply means that it doesn't have the tight controls or the ingenious level designs to match any of the really good platformers out there. Instead it opts to tell a story and frequently comes to a screetching halt just so it can dump wads of exposition into my lap via cut-scenes that go on forever. Then there's the game's puzzle mechanic which is really just aggravating because there's no way of knowing what kind of head you might be needing further ahead into any given level. I do like the cutting mechanic, though. The game's also another poster child for the quantity over quality argument. It they made it half as long yet twice as tight I probably would've loved it to bits.

It looks really terrific, though. Almost terrific enough to make up for the fact that it's just not a very good platformer.

 

[Prophecy2k]

'Objectively a popular opinion' is a nonsense statement. Opinion is 100% entirely subjective, regardless of how many or how few share it.

'Good gameplay' and 'narrative focus' are, regardless of whatever metric you care to provide, entirely subjective. To some people even naming the controlled character in a game might be too narrative focussed. To some, having to interact with any object in a game is too gameplay focussed. Extreme examples sure, but no less valid as personal opinions.

Come on now, you can do better than resorting to the fanboy card.

I'm not even sure what you're arguing here? Given what you're saying then everything is both narrative focussed and gameplay focussed and the truth in the eye of the beholder. Well thne there's no real discussion to be had as your definitions of "something"-focussed are useless.

EDIT: Also, you're right I did say "objectively a pupular opinion" but I actually meant that it's an "objectively popular" opinion, in that it's objectively true that the popular opinion is that those games mentioned have good stories and good gameplay. It's obvious opinion is subjective, but one can take into account when a specific opinion is more popular than another.

Your's clearly isn't a popular opinion. Doesn't mean it should be dismissed, but I'm sure Sony WWS isn't going to lose sleep over it.

Also, the latter wasn't intended to be a "fanboy" cry. Merely a question of whether your preferences for other certain types of games from one publisher is influencing your opinionof another publisher. Unlike many on the internet I'm capable of understanding that people are entitled to preference without that making them a fanboy.

 

[Prophecy2k]

I'm a pc gamer first and foremost, so to me when I look at games with loops I look at the most popular games being played. Mainly MOBAs followed by MMOS, CounterStrike then COD, Starcraft etc. I don't think I'm being subjective with it.

the examples provided were just console based. I wanted to avoid using PC games. But MOBAs, CS and Quake do insanely well with no story.


Agreed which is why it's there. I didn't say this was a bad thing unless in the situation that it didn't have amazing gameplay and a good narrative.

For me it's any game in which story or the direction of the game is driven by the plot. Some are more than others however. This definition is I guess unimportant.

. I never brought Halo or MS into this argument ever, that was jay24 - halo is more shooter than narrative. Always has been, the game is more traditional than current shooters that now include slow downs and QTEs. And this is my first year really making console my main gaming device.

And this was my issue with his post. You fell for his straw man argument. If you read my post entirely I did not suggest that Sony lost its moxie for targeting narrative games, but that it had continued focus on it. He managed to basically reform my argument that Sony was only green lighting narrative games made that my argument and attacked that position. They took a risk with the Order just like they did wih heavy rain. It's no different that MS taking a risk with titanfall. Should either be faulted just because they failed to deliver? No. I don't contend that Sony has lost it. It's just doing what it does already.

I'm with you. Apologies, I think I was half replying to you and half replying to the other poster in that response. Some of the bits as you rightly picked up on weren't necessarily targeted at your post.

 

[Nesh]

It simply means that it doesn't have the tight controls or the ingenious level designs to match any of the really good platformers out there. Instead it opts to tell a story and frequently comes to a screetching halt just so it can dump wads of exposition into my lap via cut-scenes that go on forever. Then there's the game's puzzle mechanic which is really just aggravating because there's no way of knowing what kind of head you might be needing further ahead into any given level. I do like the cutting mechanic, though. The game's also another poster child for the quantity over quality argument. It they made it half as long yet twice as tight I probably would've loved it to bits.

It looks really terrific, though. Almost terrific enough to make up for the fact that it's just not a very good platformer.

I dont think these were necessary problems for the game. I think the subconscious conservatism and lack of tolerance that we have today made this game's direction less acceptable. I felt the game was already too short

 

[iroboto]

I'm with you. Apologies, I think I was half replying to you and half replying to the other poster in that response. Some of the bits as you rightly picked up on weren't necessarily targeted at your post.

But it was a solid reply regardless, you nailed narrative better than I could explain

 

[FarticusMaximus]

I'm not even sure what you're arguing here? Given what you're saying then everything is both narrative focussed and gameplay focussed and the truth in the eye of the beholder. Well thne there's no real discussion to be had as your definitions of "something"-focussed are useless.

If there is no real discussion to be had, and there are only personal subjective degrees of what is gameplay-focussed or narrative-focussed, then why post your first reply stating in quite definitive terms, that any opinion that Sony published games have tended toward a narrative focus is cobblers, and anyone who thinks that way is wrong?

Quote: "I honestly don't understand what possible basis anyone can have to think this is even remotely close to a reality?"

You then followed up with "I don't think you can point to a single example of the latter (narrative-focussed games) in Sony's output over the last two generations, outside of The Order 1886. It's patently untrue.".

So which is it? Is there a definitive objective standard for what is narrative-focussed or is it entirely opinion-based?

Also, I said that's an "objectively popular" opinion, in that it's objectively true that the popular opinion is that those games mentioned have good stories and good gameplay. It's obvious opinion is subjective, but one can take into account when a specific opinion is more popular than another.

So why bring up the objectively popular opinion? What weight does this popular opinion bring to your argument that my opinion is wrong? So more people think like you than like me on this subject. Congratulations are in order I guess?

Your's clearly isn't a popular opinion. Doesn't mean it should be dismissed.

It was dismissed out of hand, and you continue to make sure everybody knows how contemptuous you find it.

I think we're done here, thanks.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

It's interesting though as with TLOU, I don't think I even found a gun until a good chunk of the way into the game.

You get a 9mm near the start of the first post-apocalyptic level I think. When you pickup your bag, mask and so on. And about two bullets

 

[Prophecy2k]

If there is no real discussion to be had, and there are only personal subjective degrees of what is gameplay-focussed or narrative-focussed, then why post your first reply stating in quite definitive terms, that any opinion that Sony published games have tended toward a narrative focus is cobblers, and anyone who thinks that way is wrong?

Quote: "I honestly don't understand what possible basis anyone can have to think this is even remotely close to a reality?"

You then followed up with "I don't think you can point to a single example of the latter (narrative-focussed games) in Sony's output over the last two generations, outside of The Order 1886. It's patently untrue.".

So which is it? Is there a definitive objective standard for what is narrative-focussed or is it entirely opinion-based?

I think you've lost me here again FarticusMaximus.

Weren't you the original poster that made the statement (worded as a definitive statement no less) that Sony's games were more "narrative-focussed" over "gameplay-focussed" than other publisher's games. That was your argument right? (Help me out here since I feel like i'm losing my marbles)

If so then, to recap on the thread, I challeneged that premise and put forward that i didn't think that Sony's games were any more "narrative-focussed" thna anyone else's.

You then replied with the (imo cop-out) response that ,""narrative-focus" and "gameplay-focus" has a purely subjective definition. Which I promptly challenged with my last post (sarcastically) that IF that was the case then there's no point in any further discussion on the subject matter, as your subjective definition of "narrative-focus" renders your original statement as not really useful for discussion or debate.

To clarify my stance, I don't believe that a "narrative-focus" or "gameplay-focus" of a game, which is a tangible entity, can possibly be subjective. It has to be an objective and measurable quantity for it to be meaningful, e.g. ratio of hours spent during active gameplay to hours of cutscenes in a single playthrough. There's nothing subjective about it.

I also don't agree that Sony's games are any more "narrative-focussed" than any other publisher's by any quantifiable metric.

You may disagree and I would challenge you to put forward some evidence to support your view based on some quantifiable means (I put the burdenof proof on you because you made the original assertion about Sony's games). Don't just throw out a cop out, "my definition of this word is subjective", because then your original assertion absolutely can be dismissed out of hand.

So why bring up the objectively popular opinion? What weight does this popular opinion bring to your argument that my opinion is wrong? So more people think like you than like me on this subject. Congratulations are in order I guess?

Why isn't it obvious? To aid discussion of course. There's no value in people on both sides with differing opinions, just flinging their subjective opinions around in order to make a point. The overall subject of this thread is about whether Sony has lost it's moxie, and whilst lots of folks may have lots of differing opinions on the matter, there are objective facts that can be addressed to support one view or another. You raised the premise that Sony had lost it's moxie becuase it's games are too "narrative-focussed", I objected with the fact that your opinion isn't a pupular one, and that I don't believe that you can come up with a quantifiabe basis with which to argue that opinion.

Opinions are opinions are opinions. Some are not based on anything but a gut feeling or personal perception/bias. Some however are based on real facts and thus I would argue are more useful.

It was dismissed out of hand, and you continue to make sure everybody knows how contemptuous you find it.

I think we're done here, thanks.

I'm not trying to single you out, but yes I disagree with your stated opinion because as you expressed it is based not on anything concrete rather your own personal perception of Sony's games, which isn't particuarly usefull or meaningful to me.

 

[FarticusMaximus]

Weren't you the original poster that made the statement (worded as a definitive statement no less) that Sony's games were more "narrative-focussed" over "gameplay-focussed" than other publisher's games. That was your argument right? (Help me out here since I feel like i'm losing my marbles)

Personally I, in my opinion, did not make a definitive statement, and was personally careful, in my opinion, in all my subsequent correspondences, to include the words 'personally' or 'in my opinion'. Personally, in my opinion, maybe I personally should have, in my opinion, personally added 'personally' a few more times. That was personally my fault there, in my opinion..

Also, at no point did I make comparisons to other publishers.

You then replied with the (imo cop-out) response that ,""narrative-focus" and "gameplay-focus" has a purely subjective definition.

I did, because I believe it is.

To clarify my stance, I don't believe that a "narrative-focus" or "gameplay-focus" of a game, which is a tangible entity, can possibly be subjective. It has to be an objective and measurable quantity for it to be meaningful, e.g. ratio of hours spent during active gameplay to hours of cutscenes in a single playthrough. There's nothing subjective about it.

I don't share your opinion, but I respect it.

I also don't agree that Sony's games are any more "narrative-focussed" than any other publisher's by any quantifiable metric.

That is not an assertion I made. I want to see this quantifiable metric though.

You may disagree and I would challenge you to put forward some evidence to support your view based on some quantifiable means (I put the burdenof proof on you because you made the original assertion about Sony's games). Don't just throw out a cop out, "my definition of this word is subjective", because then your original assertion absolutely can be dismissed out of hand.

I believe the definition is subjective, and even if you had an official scale of what is gameplay or narrative focussed, it will always be a personal decision if a particular game is too far along that scale in either direction for an individuals taste.

To enforce your 'objectivity only' rule you will need to provide a quantifiable scale of gameplay to narrative focus with an average score over all Sony published titles, and a quantifiable moxie scale, to accurately determine if Sony have lost it or not.

Show me the numbers, along with public consensus on them, and I will acquiesce.

I suggest spinning off a new thread to discuss whether a narrative focus can be objectively measured. It will allow us to gather some other viewpoints, and let this thread continue forward.

I'm not trying to single you out, but yes I disagree with your stated opinion because as you expressed it is based not on anything concrete rather your own personal perception of Sony's games, which isn't particuarly usefull or meaningful to me.

I genuinely mean no offense, but I couldn't give a tinkers cuss if you find it meaningful or not. The OP asked a question, and I replied to the OP with an answer.

 

[Prophecy2k]

If you're going to maintain that you think Sony's games are more "narrative-focussed" than other publisher's games, and then go on to insist that you base that opinion on nothing but your own subjective opinion that can neither be supported or quanitified other than by what you see, then what's the point of opening another thread to talk about it? That's your opinion and it's not gonna change.

If you however, try to support that opinion with a quantifiable basis (again I place the burden of proof on you because it's your perception), then perhaps we can discuss and debate it more as that might be a more interesting topic for discussion.

 

[FarticusMaximus]

If you're going to maintain that you think Sony's games are more "narrative-focussed" than other publisher's games

Please have the courtesy to actually read what you are replying to. As I already pointed out, I made no such comparison.

and then go on to insist that you base that opinion on nothing but your own subjective opinion that can neither be supported or quanitified other than by what you see, then what's the point of opening another thread to talk about it?

I think 'can gameplay be quantified' is an interesting subject in it's own right. Having an open mind, I'd quite like to hear other people's opinions rather than just calling them wrong, stamping my feet and refusing to discuss it.

Anyway, thread created. Join in the discussion or don't.

 

[Xbat]

I think like the campaign against Chelsea Sony is facing a similar thing.
I've been playing games since I was 4 years old in otherwords 1987. I love driveclub and I'm really enjoying the Order so far both games that got shat on. I dont believe there is a conspiracy against Sony but I think this is blowback from all the over the top positive reviews we used to get and now they have gone to far in the other direction. I also think reviewers are rating games against some mythical next gen gameplay that doesnt exist instead of other games that are already out.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I love driveclub and I'm really enjoying the Order so far both games that got shat on.

DriveClub barely worked and The Order didn't live up to the hype. That's why they were received negatively by critics, and many gamers, alike.

Assassin's Creed Unity also had a bad launch due to bugs and poor performance. Frankly, this is how it should be.

 

[DrJay24]

The Order didn't live up to the hype. .

To be factually correct, the hype was not big to began with and previews since the first demo were overwhelmingly negative. So I don't think that "living up to the hype" is actually meaningful in this case. I think it fits more aptly with game like Evolve or Titanfall which were award winners for game show previews and media darlings from first announcement to release.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

To be factually correct, the hype was not big to began with and previews since the first demo were overwhelmingly negative. So I don't think that "living up to the hype" is actually meaningful in this case. I think it fits more aptly with game like Evolve or Titanfall which were award winners for game show previews and media darlings from first announcement to release.

I guess it depends which media you read. As a subscriber to both EDGE and GameInformer, I can tell you both outlets have been following developer and running articles fairly frequently. They've also been taking the game to public events and there's also been a fair amount of advertising here in the UK and I've read lots of interviews with RAD folks.

From my perspective, they've been hyping this quite hard.

 

[DrJay24]

I guess it depends which media you read. As a subscriber to both EDGE and GameInformer, I can tell you both outlets have been following developer and running articles fairly frequently. They've also been taking the game to public events and there's also been a fair amount of advertising here in the UK and I've read lots of interviews with RAD folks.

From my perspective, they've been hyping this quite hard.

You are talking more about controlled PR and advertising. I'm speaking about hands on previews and forum chatter, which has been almost entirely negative since the first showing.

I searched "The Order 1886 preview 2014" and took a random link.

http://metro.co.uk/2014/12/09/the-order-1886-hands-on-preview-old-fashioned-gameplay-4980650/

Beyond the visuals there’s nothing in the game, or at least the demo, that couldn’t have been done on a PlayStation 2. Nor is there any sign that developer Ready At Dawn were in the least bit interested in inventing anything new. We haven’t see any of the combat with the monsters yet, but it and the story are going to have to be out of their world to prevent this being a huge disappointment.

The Oder has been a punching bag for journalist and gamers for over a year. That is not exactly hype that is hard to live up to.

 

[Sigfried1977]

Let's resolve this semantic squabble by replacing The Order didn't live up to the hype with The Order really came out a bit shite, then.

 

[Xbat]

Lived up to the hype for me and I would like to know if you played it. You are entitled to your opinion but I find very often people on forums havent even played the games they commenting on.I dont really play online so Driveclub launch was fine for me it did what I needed which was have really good gameplay and fantastic visuals.