Will revolution be released last?

[London Geezer]

A lot. Nintendo creates them on their own. MS and Sony buy who create a good game and then promote it to get it to be a franchise.

So Sony and MS have different internal teams, like Nintendo's first party teams, only Sony and MS's creations are not actually their own, cause everyone happens to know that the teams used to be separate (but are not now). Whereas the creations from Nintendo's teams, whatever teams, are all Nintendo's creation, no matter what. :| Oh well...

 

[Apoc]

Opinions are like ass, everybody have one.

You have your opinion, I have mine, so be it.

 

[cybamerc]

london-boy:

Just give me a name. How hard can it be?

 

[London Geezer]

Opinions are like ass, everybody have one.

You have your opinion, I have mine, so be it.

Some have better asses than others

Guess it's an agree to disagree case.

 

[London Geezer]

london-boy:

Just give me a name. How hard can it be?

Oh wait wait wait i know this one, Sony has never ever created anything original!!

Whatever names i come up with, out of the huge PS1/PS2 library, i don't think it'll of any use with you because it's like talking to a wall.

 

[Apoc]

Some have better asses than others

Well, natoma is not here, so....

Guess it's an agree to disagree case.

Yes, i think it too.

 

[London Geezer]

Some have better asses than others

Well, natoma is not here, so....

Oh we both (Natoma and I) know who wins there.

 

[cybamerc]

london-boy:

> Oh wait wait wait i know this one, Sony has never ever created
> anything original!!

I didn't say that.

> Whatever names i come up with, out of the huge PS1/PS2 library

Let's not bring PS1 into this. You said last few years which would limit your selection to PS2 games. You also said "succesful" which limits your selection even further.

> i don't think it'll of any use with you because it's like talking to a wall.

Just name me a single title and quit stalling.

 

[function]

Frankly, so what if Nintendo create their own franchises, rather than invest in promising studios and bring them and their titles onboard. The end user doesn't care (rabid fanbois aside). All that matters is where the killer games are, and how well this fact is promoted. The larger the developer base, the better your chances of finding such a killer app.

Speaking of which, the new Zelda looks great. If Nintendo had turned this out early in the GC's lifespan, like they should instead of Wind Waker, perhaps Nintendo would have had a system shifting title to compare to the likes of the "bought in" Halo, and "limited exclusivity" GTA3 / Vice City / San Andreas.

 

[London Geezer]

london-boy:

> Oh wait wait wait i know this one, Sony has never ever created
> anything original!!

I didn't say that.

> Whatever names i come up with, out of the huge PS1/PS2 library

Let's not bring PS1 into this. You said last few years which would limit your selection to PS2 games. You also said "succesful" which limits your selection even further.

> i don't think it'll of any use with you because it's like talking to a wall.

Just name me a single title and quit stalling.

Actually i said "EVER", and i never said "successful" but it doesn't matter with you. J&D was quite good, so is the GT franchise, which now you will tell me it's not from Sony so that's where the problem is. ICO is one of the best games in this generation.
There are a lot of things Sony will never get credited for, and i'm certainly not here to convince people otherwise, it's their problem, i don't work for Sony...

 

[cybamerc]

london-boy:

> Actually i said "EVER", and i never said "successful"

You said: "Bloody hell, everyone else was able to invent successful franchises in the last few years..."

That must include Sony.

> J&D was quite good, so is the GT franchise, which now you will tell me
> it's not from Sony so that's where the problem is.

GT is a Sony franchise but it's old. J&D was created before Sony bought Naughty Dog.

> ICO is one of the best games in this generation.

Was it successful though?

 

[London Geezer]

See. It's all "but... but... but...", that's why i didn't bother before.
GT is certainly not as old as Nintendo's franchises. Jak is Sony's whatever way you look at it. Ico is Ico.

 

[tuna]

Didn't Sony buy Naughty Dog sometime in 1999-2000?

 

[rabidrabbit]

If we compare the original Nintendo and Sony franchises this gen, I think both would be about on the same level.
Of course, as Nintendo has such a longer history making videogame hardware and software, their line-up if viewed throughout history is (or should be, if quantity really does matter in this ) larger.

Here's what come to my mind, if there are more, or if some are wrong please feel free to add or correct.

This gen, Nintendo:
Pikmin

This gen, Sony:
EyeToy (London Studio)
WRC Rally (Evolution Studios) (Is this Sony studio?)
Getaway (London?) (Succesfull... hmmm..?)
Sing Star (London Studio)


Throughout history, Nintendo:
Mario
Zelda
Donkey Kong
Pokemon
F-Zero
Pikmin
Metroid
Animal Crossing
Wave Race

Throughout history, Sony:
Gran Turismo (Polyphony)
Wipeout (Studio Liverpool)
WRC Rally (Evolution Studios) ?
Getaway (London Studio)
F1 Series (Liverpool Studios)
EyeToy (London Studio)
SingStar (London Studio)
Ape Escape (SCEI)
Twisted Metal (Incognito)

Edit: I delibrately left out Jak, Ratchet & Clank, ICO and Sly Raccoon out from Sony's list, as they would only cause too much argument whether they are Sony studios or not (and because I really don't know, though I'd guess Naughty Dog is essentially a Sony studio), or whether they are "franchises" as such (ICO)

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Maybe Sony and MS don't have Sony and MS studios that creative original IP like Nintendo does. But the problem is the lack of new IP on Nintendo's platforms. They've even added Nintendo characters to third party games.

On PS and XB we can expect lots of new ideas as third-party developers create content. On GC (Rev?) we can expect Mario, Zelda, etc., no matter what the game. For a lot of people that's a problem. It's seemingly Mario in almost every game! Why when Nintendo created a tennis game did they centre it on existing Mario characters? Why not just create a tennis game with new characters?

I guess you could say the opposite is FF, where every game, though part of a series, had new characters and different stories.

Anyway, for Sony derived IP, surely there's EQ and EyeToy that I know of.

 

[London Geezer]

If we compare the original Nintendo and Sony franchises this gen, I think both would be about on the same level.
Of course, as Nintendo has such a longer history making videogame hardware and software, their line-up if viewed throughout history is larger.

Here's what come to my mind, if there are more, or if some are wrong please feel free to add or correct.

This gen, Nintendo:
Pikmin

This gen, Sony:
EyeToy (London Studio)
WRC Rally (Evolution Studios) (Is this Sony studio?)
Getaway (London?) (Succesfull... hmmm..?)
Sing Star (London Studio)


Throughout history, Nintendo:
Mario
Zelda
Donkey Kong
Pokemon
F-Zero
Pikmin
Metroid
Animal Crossing
Wave Race

Throughout history, Sony:
Gran Turismo (Polyphony)
Wipeout (Studio Liverpool)
WRC Rally (Evolution Studios) ?
Getaway (London Studio)
F1 Series (Liverpool Studios)
EyeToy (London Studio)
SingStar (London Studio)
Ape Escape (SCEI)
Twisted Metal (Incognito)

Where's ICO!!! And Jak!!
Wipeout was invented by Psygnosis i believe, and it was also released on PC, Saturn and N64, long before they got bought out by Sony and made one of their internal studios.

 

[rabidrabbit]

l-b: I edited the post to include ICO and Jak.

 

[cybamerc]

Didn't Sony buy Naughty Dog sometime in 1999-2000?

No. I just checked and Naughty Dog was acquired early 2001 which is still a lot earlier than I remembered. Still, Jak & Daxter was under development way before Naughty Dog became part of Sony.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Edit: I delibrately left out...ICO...I really don't know...whether they are "franchises" as such (ICO)

Why does franchises matter? The argument against Nintendo is lack of original IP and reliance on long-running franchises. ICO is original, so counts. Just because it hasn't had 16 repetitive sequels doesn't make it unoriginal!! Indeed the console with least repetitive franchises and IP reuse will be the one with the most original sequel-less titles.

As an example of where Franchising is stupid, the upcoming Gauntlet game has nothing in relation to the original in terms of gameplay or visuals, and the characters in the original were so generic they can't count either. The next Gauntlet game is original IP but using a franchise to help gain awareness. The franchise itself adds nothing unique to the game, just as the Mario franchise for Mario Tennis adds nothing unique to the game.

Reliance on franchises shouldn't count in this argument as to whether Sony or MS or Nintendo have brought more new ideas into gaming.

 

[wazoo]

If MS or Sony had the Mario Ip, they would use it as well. In fact, MS would kill to have Mario on board.

Nintendo will launch with a new Mario game, just because it is the biggest IP ever

Bloody hell, everyone else was able to invent successful franchises in the last few years, why can't Nintendo?

you do not invent "successful franchises". There is no magical rule to get a "succesful franchise" (otherwiee, everybody would do it). Nintendo tried a few new IP this gens, which resulted from flop to moderate multi million success.

Considering the 5 biggest sales on GC are coming mario/Zelda franchises, it is not magic to think nintendo will rely on thrm at launch.