Sony's first party games - all flash and no substance?

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

Then I guess the only thing left to say is that nobody here knows what you are talking about...including yourself. You say it isn't about the quality of the games, but the title says otherwise. You say this isn't about support for games, but as pointed out, your post says otherwise. You claim it is about people on SW talking, but your post doesn't hint at that, and if that is all you are basing your opinion on, then you are starting with a shaky foudnation anyway.

Ninja-Hippo

I don't think I've missed the point at all. Your comment is that Sony, for one reason or another, is making games that don't have long term appeal. You believe it is because they spend too much time and money focusing purely on graphics, which results in games with little to no substance.

But I notice you did not address my initial response. I have long held the theory that while PS consoles often have a diverse user base with varied tastes, Xbox consoles appeal to a very specific and narrow audience which buys only select games. In other words, not all PS users like FPS. Not all like online or action/adventure. Not all like LBP. But there are games for everyone. And while this somewhat tampers the massive success of certian highly hyped games, it certainly doesn't speak to their quality. Perhaps there are so many diverse games out there that people jump around and move on more quickly. I know 3 other people with PS3s, and we all have very different game libraries. We all have Killzone, of course, but other than that we share very few titles between us.

Think of the PS2 as an example. It had the single biggest and most diverse library of any console to date. It currently has 150 million sales world wide. Yet its biggest game is what? GTA Vice City? San Andreas maybe? Which sold maybe what - 20 million copies? Lemmings (and yourself) would apparantly think the game either sucks or has no long term appeal. All flash and no substance. This is blatantly false because the games were HUGE, they just appeal to a certain market and the PS2 had MORE than that one single market.

On the other hand, I find that every single person I know with an Xbox or 360, all have practically identical libraries. I know 4 people with 360s and the different titles are actually the exception. They all have libraries primarily made up of FPS and they all have Mass Effect and they all worship Halo 3. They all went out and bought Gears and Gears 2 on launch. Etc. Now those are great games, but what about the less hyped games? What about more standard RPGs? Or other non-shooter genres? What happens to those? Well, if sales charts combined with my own experiences are any indicator...nothing. They don't sell. Games on 360 are either hot or cold. On PS3 they may not be as hot, but they aren't as cold either. They remain lukewarm. Which people can think what they will when it comes to the value or importance of that.

Meanwhile, I disagree with your opinions on those games. I still love Uncharted. I have beaten it twice and if I wasn't behind on my game library (GTA4, Killzone 2, Dead Space, etc. yes...I have more games than time right now) I would have beaten it twice more to get all the trophies. So clearly that alone should tell you the game has long term value. I would also point out that lemmings called UNcharted a bomb when it came out, but the game maintained that level of salesover a long period of time which made it a hit. It didn't have that massive spike in sales so many 360 games have...but it didn't have that massive drop off either. It started slow but kept selling over time.

So I will leave you with this question: which is more valuable? A diverse audiance that buys many different games, or a narrow audience who primarily buys a certain type of game and then plays it for years at the expense of other games? Which is better? People playing one massive game for two years, or people playing games then moving on to other, newer games that come out?

[QUOTE="thepwninator"][QUOTE="Mordred19"]I think saying "no substance" would just be going too far.Mordred19

[QUOTE="ironcreed"]LOL, speak for yourself, friend. I will take Sony's first party ANY DAY over Microsofts.thepwninator

That's it, man, just all personal preference, and I respect the opinion of the TC - just strongly disagree, that's all, lol. Oh, and I have been around.You could not pry me away from the pit that is SW.:P

You should remove that guy on the far right of your PSN ID. I forget his name and the game he was in (totally forgettable action flick game), but I bet you did too. You should get Snake and some MGS4 love in there. Check and see if they have any Halo ones with Master Chef.

Nike_Air

Lol. Great point. IN fact, that game and character were so forgetable to me that I totally forgot I had the ID at all. It's like my mind blocked it out from the sheer underwhelming-ness of it all.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how the OP's rationalization of using some nebulous "buzz" indicator isvalid regarding a game's substance.

OldSkoolGamer04

I think most bigger games this generation have been superb in all areas. I just think people are getting to be too "entitled" to the point that they feel that games are getting worse, since they are not being given perfection. Just my 2 cents.SpruceCaboose

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]Ninja-Hippo

I've read everything. I simply want to know why the crux of your argument seems to be that the PS3 games lack substance because, in your mind, there isn't much "buzz" about them anymore. How is that an accurate measurement? It's not a rhetorical question, either.

And did you see my first post, which was the first reply to your message? I was being honest. I even took it a step further. I'm not defending anything except the people you've disagreed with for using evidence that you say doesn't represent your stance, when in fact you used the very same type of evidence yourself in support of your position.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="thepwninator"] Out of all of the PS3 exclusives I've played, the only one I can see myself remembering particularly well a year or two down the road is MGS4. PGundamGuy0

don't forget killzone! yay opinions!

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]I think most bigger games this generation have been superb in all areas. I just think people are getting to be too "entitled" to the point that they feel that games are getting worse, since they are not being given perfection. Just my 2 cents.Ninja-Hippo

[QUOTE="GundamGuy0"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] I'm in the exact same boat, hence the opinion. MGS4 absolutely blew me away - nothing else has really done that. They've been great games, definately, but forgettable. Mr_Apple_Soup

don't forget killzone! yay opinions!

I've read everything. I simply want to know why the crux of your argument seems to be that the PS3 games lack substance because, in your mind, there isn't much "buzz" about them anymore. How is that an accurate measurement? It's not a rhetorical question, either.

And did you see my first post, which was the first reply to your message? I was being honest. I even took it a step further. I'm not defending anything except the people you've disagreed with for using evidence that you say doesn't represent your stance, when in fact you used the very same type of evidence yourself in support of your position.

OldSkoolGamer04

Hippo, your just stating your oppinion and thats it. You are plainly disregarding ANYTHINGthat would measure Sony's exclusives to have substance. And what you are saying is cross the board by your oppinion and not just Sony's games.

I mean really PS3 users are getting bombed by a huge amount of games so communities get split, sales get split up, topics get split in forums and even friends lists get all out of disaray by these different games. I mean on the 360 you literally have got like 2 fps games, thats Halo3 and cod series so a community stays intack, while on the ps3 we have Rfom, KZ2, cod series. While also having in the tps genre Socom and even Mgo and both are getting updates and soon Socom will have a huge patch to really complete the game and fans are very ancious of this aswell while new content for Mgo and Socom's on the horizon aswell.

LBP,good community, KZ2 good community, Rfom good community, Socom good community. Cod series good community. Mgo good community.

I just think in a time of Sony putting out alot of games you are thinking that everyone should just be concentrating on 1 game for a year at a time. This just isn't going to be the case. So don't be upset by this and should rejoice that Sony is putting so much time into its games to really make these games as polished as they have been. And you really should get used to it or get ready to hang on cause this is fixing to get really out of hand lol, with the launch of Infamous in a couple of weeks, and then HeavyRain later, then U2, then GOWIII, then GT5 and so on lol.

Its either your concerned with PS3 users moving on to the games as they come out so fast especially in SW'sor your just still hyping MGS4, which I'm perfectly fine with :) But its tough and expensive to be a ps3 users nowa days:)

But for me its been Socom and KZ2 for the most part since Aug of last year, with a little LBP thrown in for good measure.

Hippo, your just stating your oppinion and thats it.

GreyFoXX4

[QUOTE="OldSkoolGamer04"]

I've read everything. I simply want to know why the crux of your argument seems to be that the PS3 games lack substance because, in your mind, there isn't much "buzz" about them anymore. How is that an accurate measurement? It's not a rhetorical question, either.

And did you see my first post, which was the first reply to your message? I was being honest. I even took it a step further. I'm not defending anything except the people you've disagreed with for using evidence that you say doesn't represent your stance, when in fact you used the very same type of evidence yourself in support of your position.

[QUOTE="OldSkoolGamer04"]

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how the OP's rationalization of using some nebulous "buzz" indicator isvalid regarding a game's substance.

Ninja-Hippo

But you're making the mistake of arguing that if a game generates buzz, it must have substance. Big Rigs has left a huge impression on the gaming world, but is it due to deep substance? Halo 3 probably does get discussed more than Ratchet and Clank, but is that because it has more substance? Only if you consider having MP a "yes" by default. Wii Sports Bowling will be remembered longer than Little King's Story, but is it of better quality?

All I'm saying is that your argument is shallow, and then when people use your own criteria against you, you distance yourself from it. Doesn't make sense.

And again: I agree with you. But I think the "buzz" thing comes from two facts: 360 has a bigger user base (ditto for Wii), and it has more multiplayer games. It's hard for R&C, Uncharted and Heavenly Sword to compete, for example, when you don't have the online portion to discuss.

CLIFF NOTES because i'm tired of people posting aggressively toward me having not bothered to even read the post:

Sony's first party games almost always feature state-of-the-art technology powering them, but the gameplay seems to have a lower benchmark. Not to say that any of Sony's games are bad - far from it - however i feel the emphasis on making their games a showcase for the PS3's graphical capability is selling them short in terms of really innovative, outstanding gameplay and design. Instead, they release consistant and 'solid' games which garner good reviews and are generally enjoyed by those who play them, but which quickly die down in terms of general enthusiasm and interest in the game, much like a summer action-flick at the movies which, while fun to watch, leaves no lasting impression on the viewer.

ORIGINAL POST:

It seems to me that Sony's games just dont hold any interest in either System wars or the gaming community as a whole. If we take Killzone 2, easily the biggest blockbuster to hit the PS3 this year, and it's all but dead in just a couple of months. Halo 3 tops the Live charts week after week and is still discussed here pretty much daily, yet Killzone 2 appears to have had it's brief flash in the pan and then faded away in no time at all. I think this is because the game's graphics were its selling point. Once you'd seen it in action, admired the pretty effects and grown accustomed to them, there just isn't that much else to get you excited about the game.

Same with games like Ratchet and Clank and Uncharted. Decent enough gameplay, but real emphasis on the visuals. I think this approach adds up to generally dull games in the long-term. Take a movie like Wanted. Visually striking, and pretty fun while you're watching it, but once you're done it's completely forgettable. You dont want to go see it again. You dont want to go talk about it.

Take Little Big Planet - remember how that game was going to rule the world? What happened? It fizzled out in a matter of weeks.

I think Sony are trying to hard to convince gamers that their system is the 'premium' piece of tech by investing so much in graphics and effects, often at the behest of truly outstanding gameplay. So long as it looks fantastic, and plays competently enough, they seem happy to release the game, and people want something more than that.

EDIT:

I'm not saying Sony game suck by any means, nor is this a simple matter of total threads on system wars per day.

I'm sorry you feel you're forgetting Sony first-party exclusives and it's as valid opinion as any. I on the other hand consider Uncharted and Killzone 2 to be among the most exciting games this gen. Oh, gee maybe I should make a thread and claim that Sony first-party games are unforgetable based on that amount of zero facts?

I'm sorry you feel you're forgetting Sony first-party exclusives and it's as valid opinion as any. I on the other hand consider Uncharted and Killzone 2 to be among the most exciting games this gen. Oh, gee maybe I should make a thread and claim that Sony first-party games are unforgetable based on that amount of zero facts?

theSADmafioso

Actually, the real problem I have isn't what I stated in my last post. The real problem I had initially is how you're measuring this "buzz," and how when people fire back you fall back on "Well that doesn't disprove my point," even though it's a direct contradiction.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="OldSkoolGamer04"]

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how the OP's rationalization of using some nebulous "buzz" indicator isvalid regarding a game's substance.

OldSkoolGamer04

But you're making the mistake of arguing that if a game generates buzz, it must have substance. Big Rigs has left a huge impression on the gaming world, but is it due to deep substance? Halo 3 probably does get discussed more than Ratchet and Clank, but is that because it has more substance? Only if you consider having MP a "yes" by default. Wii Sports Bowling will be remembered longer than Little King's Story, but is it of better quality?

All I'm saying is that your argument is shallow, and then when people use your own criteria against you, you distance yourself from it. Doesn't make sense.

And again: I agree with you. But I think the "buzz" thing comes from two facts: 360 has a bigger user base (ditto for Wii), and it has more multiplayer games. It's hard for R&C, Uncharted and Heavenly Sword to compete, for example, when you don't have the online portion to discuss.

Actually, the real problem I have isn't what I stated in my last post. The real problem I had initially is how you're measuring this "buzz," and how when people fire back you fall back on "Well that doesn't disprove my point," even though it's a direct contradiction.

OldSkoolGamer04

Good post and I agree. There's games that I was excited for and played like Heavenly Sword, Resistance 1 and 2, Motorstorm 1 and 2,Socom, Super Star Dust, Flower, Killzone 2 etc. but within after a month I couldn't force myself to get back into those games. Although all games will lose their appeal, I do feel these Sony first party lose it faster. There's like XNA and XBLA games that I bought a couple years ago and to this day still have fun playing.

I think one reason they lose their appeal faster is probably the lack of community and support these Sony first party get. I mean I want to continue to play Socom but that game gets no support what so ever. In the end I agree these Sony first party games looks amazing but it really do lack the substance. At least people here support them, somebody has to.

Actually, the real problem I have isn't what I stated in my last post. The real problem I had initially is how you're measuring this "buzz," and how when people fire back you fall back on "Well that doesn't disprove my point," even though it's a direct contradiction.

[QUOTE="theSADmafioso"]

I'm sorry you feel you're forgetting Sony first-party exclusives and it's as valid opinion as any. I on the other hand consider Uncharted and Killzone 2 to be among the most exciting games this gen. Oh, gee maybe I should make a thread and claim that Sony first-party games are unforgetable based on that amount of zero facts?

Ninja-Hippo

True but if that was your aim then why do I see you going around replying to people who agree with your theory and saying that they are prime example of human understanding that get your argument. Yet when people come out and point out the many flaws in your argument/theory you go "You don't get my point" -avoidant?

Let's assume that we actually don't get your point which is possible. Then who is to blame for that when around 85% of the people in this thread "Don't seem to get your point"? Maybe you should have spent more time writing the original post?

Good post and I agree. There's games that I was excited for and played like Heavenly Sword, Resistance 1 and 2, Motorstorm 1 and 2,Socom, Super Star Dust, Flower, Killzone 2 etc. but within after a month I couldn't force myself to get back into those games. Although all games will lose their appeal, I do feel these Sony first party lose it faster. There's like XNA and XBLA games that I bought a couple years ago and to this day still have fun playing.

I think one reason they lose their appeal faster is probably the lack of community and support these Sony first party get. I mean I want to continue to play Socom but that game gets no support what so ever. In the end I agree these Sony first party games looks amazing but it really do lack the substance. At least people here support them, somebody has to.

I'm more interested in your claim that these games have no "substance". Can you clarify that point? Bread_or_Decide

[QUOTE="OldSkoolGamer04"]

Actually, the real problem I have isn't what I stated in my last post. The real problem I had initially is how you're measuring this "buzz," and how when people fire back you fall back on "Well that doesn't disprove my point," even though it's a direct contradiction.

Ninja-Hippo

If what you're saying here is true, then this is where you went wrong:

"Halo 3 tops the Live charts week after week and is still discussed here pretty much daily, yet Killzone 2 appears to have had it's brief flash in the pan and then faded away in no time at all."

This is a direct attempt to quantify interest, and it established, in your own words, a kind of measurement for how to identify substance. This is what people were replying to when they gave you answers like, "But Killzone 2 is mentioned here all the time!" For you to brush that off as a valid rebuttle is hypocritical.

[QUOTE="OldSkoolGamer04"]

Actually, the real problem I have isn't what I stated in my last post. The real problem I had initially is how you're measuring this "buzz," and how when people fire back you fall back on "Well that doesn't disprove my point," even though it's a direct contradiction.

Ninja-Hippo

Yeah, you're probably right...

Hmm

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]I'm more interested in your claim that these games have no "substance". Can you clarify that point? GreyFoXX4

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="OldSkoolGamer04"]

Actually, the real problem I have isn't what I stated in my last post. The real problem I had initially is how you're measuring this "buzz," and how when people fire back you fall back on "Well that doesn't disprove my point," even though it's a direct contradiction.

NoXboxGamer

Good post and I agree. There's games that I was excited for and played like Heavenly Sword, Resistance 1 and 2, Motorstorm 1 and 2,Socom, Super Star Dust, Flower, Killzone 2 etc. but within after a month I couldn't force myself to get back into those games. Although all games will lose their appeal, I do feel these Sony first party lose it faster. There's like XNA and XBLA games that I bought a couple years ago and to this day still have fun playing.

I think one reason they lose their appeal faster is probably the lack of community and support these Sony first party get. I mean I want to continue to play Socom but that game gets no support what so ever. In the end I agree these Sony first party games looks amazing but it really do lack the substance. At least people here support them, somebody has to.

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"] Well that would be your failure to clarify the point. Not our failure in derailing the thread. Ninja-Hippo

This thread is all flash and no substance...

Ninja-Hippo got everyone hot under the collar with his claim, but now all that is being discussed is definitions and opinions.

[QUOTE="NoXboxGamer"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] I'm not trying to measure 'buzz'. Never did. Was speaking of my general opinions and perceptions regarding the gaming community's reaction and following of certain games. The ridiculous attempts to quantify interest in a game is where the thread was derailed.Ninja-Hippo

How do you define "left a lasting impression". What does that even mean?

If what you're saying here is true, then this is where you went wrong:

"Halo 3 tops the Live charts week after week and is still discussed here pretty much daily, yet Killzone 2 appears to have had it's brief flash in the pan and then faded away in no time at all."

This is a direct attempt to quantify interest, and it established, in your own words, a kind of measurement for how to identify substance. This is what people were replying to when they gave you answers like, "But Killzone 2 is mentioned here all the time!" For you to brush that off as a valid rebuttle is hypocritical.

OldSkoolGamer04