why doesn't Sony leverage its movie studio IP for the PS3?

T

Tetramagic2

Newcomer
I was wondering what sort of IP sony owns through their movie studios (Columbia, TriStar, MGM, etc) to create exclusive content for their game division? It seems like a strength to take advantage of over MS.

Since they own the James Bond character, why not make it so that his games have to be exclusive to the system? Why not RockyBalboa games, with FN3 graphics? Most of the general public don't know anything about boxing or boxers, so a "Clubber Lang" or "Ivan Drago" means more to them than Bernard Hopkins or Floyd Mayweather does. Why not (fill in the blank)

Also, since they don't really have a mascot anymore (I think the Crash Bandicoot character died off and I dont think anything has really replaced it) why not introduce some cartoon character they own and make some games off of it? I am thinking like the Pink Panther, to be their official mascot. Its much easier than creating some new characters that take a while to register with fans.
pink.jpg


Can anyone think of other cartoon characters Sony owns that they could use as a mascot?
 
I'm also wondering why Sony doesn't have all their content like songs or SD/HD movies for rent or sale over the PS Store. It's kinda weird to see MS beating Sony to punch with this,when Sony owns more content in that regard than MS.
 
Sony Pictures generally does not own movie IP's. They have the right to create and distribute film. AFAIK James Bond is not owned by them and neither is Spiderman. IP's are a myriad of inter-connected contracts.
 
Tetramagic2 said:
Also, since they don't really have a mascot anymore (I think the Crash Bandicoot character died off and I dont think anything has really replaced it) why not introduce some cartoon character they own and make some games off of it?
Click to expand...
I think mascots died in the 16 bit era. Sonic and Mario were the end of it. Every wannabe consoles after then kept looking for mascots, but nothing stuck. There's no point to mascot's these days where conosles cover such huge diversity in genres and IPs. You don't want to be tied to a fluffy cartoon character if you also want to appeal to bloody FPS fans, and neither do you want to have a grizzly space marine as the face of your console when you're wanting to reach younger audiences too.

Though if Sony were to take a mascot, I'd recommend Sack-Boy. LBP is iconic in appearance and difference from the norm, embodying much of PS3 at the moment.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
Though if Sony were to take a mascot, I'd recommend Sack-Boy. LBP is iconic in appearance and difference from the norm, embodying much of PS3 at the moment.
Click to expand...

that was actually got me thinking about this subject, that they went ahead and created these characters to demo off. If Nintendo was trying to demo off something they would probably use their Mario line.

I still think there is a wealth of movie/tv/music IP that Sony owns that they don't effectively utilize, it seems like the biggest advantage they have over their competitors.
 
Tetramagic2 said:
that was actually got me thinking about this subject, that they went ahead and created these characters to demo off.
Click to expand...
The characters are actual game characters, and not just created for a demo. It's the same as showing Nariko in a demo of Heavenly Sword.
 
Tetramagic2 said:
im under the impression that its not really a game, as much as it is tools that users can use to create games with
Click to expand...
It's a game that's open ended for users to create their own content, with emphasis on creating content. The developers are providing levels to play through, as indicated by the comment that users will be able to find objects as they play through levels that the devs provide.
 
I think EA actually has the rights to Bond, and Marvel has Spiderman. Sony has the movie rights to a lot of things, but when you start talking about other media they aren't as powerful.
 
Joshua Luna said:
Master Chief?
Click to expand...
Perhaps. But it's worth noting that as a strong FPS character, XB also had a strong reputation as an FPS platform. As does XB360, which is a reputation that's doing MS more harm than good I expect. And as the face of XBox, he doesn't get around much, unlike Sonic and Mario that had loads of titles. Plus he's on PC too!

I think he's key IP people associate with the platform, but isn't a mascot. Dunno. Does MS get people dressed up in Master Chief costumes at their events? And hand out Master Chief cuddly-toys (or action figures)?
 
Joshua Luna said:
Master Chief?
Click to expand...

Master chief is like Steven segal. For some reason it sells but god knows why (not towards Halo but towards chief as a character).

Anyway besides the whole IP story could the life of movie games and the price of the ps3 also be a factor? For example you can only market a rocky game for a very short time and the game will probably mostly be bought by casual gamers. But how much casual gamers will pay 660 euro's to play a rocky game wich probably isnt even such a good game? such games will probably only sell good if you got a console that is cheap enough to consider buying for one or 2 half decent games.
 
Tetramagic2 said:
I was wondering what sort of IP sony owns through their movie studios (Columbia, TriStar, MGM, etc) to create exclusive content for their game division?
Click to expand...
If Sony Pictures makes a certain movie PS3 exclusive it limits the potential revenue. Sony Pictures can make more money if more people come to them for the request of distribution. The exclusivity you propose is unlikely to make more money.

As for Halo, Phil Harrison repeatedly warns about the danger of characterization of a platform by a single genre not by a broad portfolio.
 
Nesh said:
Well I never noticed
Click to expand...

You never noticed the MC had become an exclusive symbol for Microsoft?
Technically a mascot is a symbol that a company adopts,while Mario and Master Chief(also Kratos from God of War) were created but they serve the exact same purpose and that is brand recognition.
 
ninzel said:
You never noticed the MC had become an exclusive symbol for Microsoft?
Technically a mascot is a symbol that a company adopts,while Mario and Master Chief(also Kratos from God of War) were created but they serve the exact same purpose and that is brand recognition.
Click to expand...

Halo as a whole seems like an exclusive "symbol" to XBOX to me as in being promoted a lot my MS to make known in public the exclusivity of a quality game.

I really cant see Master Chief, Kratos etc as mascots for their respective consoles.

edit: Besides Mater Chief wasnt created to become an XBOX symbol. It was going to be released on different platforms before, with the same character that wasnt supposed to be tight to a certain brand. It kind of automatically became tight to XBOX when Halo became an exclusive to XBOX and the very first AAA game to push it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top