720°

IGN: Why I Think PlayStation Won E3

Clearly, when taken as a whole, Sony won this year's E3 in terms of providing games to gamers. Sure, there's anticipation and excitement for what Microsoft is doing with Xbox 360, and rightfully so.

The games were with Sony this year, and games are what I get most excited about.

MintBerryCrunch5133d ago

no clear winner this year...in terms of content, ill give it to sony tho

majority of games shown for the Wii U were ps3/360 trailers...so we dont know the full potential of the console yet

MS keeps pushing kinect into the living room...them not showing a new core IP for the 360 was a letdown, but having stable franchises will keep the system and its games selling into the year

Nitrowolf25133d ago (Edited 5133d ago )

Yeah i don't think there was any clear winner. None really got me hugely excited like previous years, but one thing they both Sony and Nintendo did was hit the spot with their fanbase. Sony by giving the right price for Vita and Nintendo for showing that they can cater hardcore gamers now. Microsoft did good to but to much casual stuff again. Ghost recon might be good with Kinect, we will see.

Overall i thought this E3 for the big 3 was a lacking.

Thought this was funny though
http://i.imgur.com/BhYHo.gi...

MintBerryCrunch5133d ago

lol...love the gif

same guy...bit offtopic but still hilarious

http://thefrogman.me/post/6...

5133d ago
Rikan5133d ago

@Booch

Halo CE:Anniversary
Halo 4
Gears 3
Fable 3
Forza 4

Thats just to match your list. Helps to loose the bias and actually watch E3 for the games. Get over yourself.

Rainstorm815133d ago

hey rikan, what's that your E3 2010 or 2011 list?

I cant tell as those games are at every E3 for microsoft.

Nitrowolf25133d ago (Edited 5133d ago )

@Booch

the thing was i was hoping to see some more game reveals or clip from game such as Agent, FF versus, Journey, Sorcery and a bunch more from Sony.

MS did good with Halo, Fable, and Forza but they def aren't the winner if there was one out of the three, cause these are literally the same thing we see from them to cater those hardcore gamers every year. I want to see a new IP from them. They have been riding the same game for years.

I agree with Nintendo. They could have impressed but they kind of destroyed it by showing off a bunch of multiplat and not showing any real games from them and such.

good point though

I guess a lot of us feel for the hype and thought it would keep getting better year after year. We are in the middle of the life os PS3/Xbox360 so i guess things have to settle down eventually.

But i guess i'll agree Sony Won it, but it wasn't by miles or anything like that.

Catatafish5133d ago

At the lot of ya.

If the PC gaming where a unified Dev or platform PC gaming won E3 hands muthaeffing down without a fight.

ABizzel15133d ago

Definitely between Sony and Nintendo. Sony did exactly what they needed to do, and Nintendo did good, but they didn't show anything hardcore for the Wii beside a picture of Zelda and trailers for 3rd party games.

The thing that upset me most, was that both Sony and Nintendo had a bunch of other games at the show, they just didn't put them into their conferences. Twisted Metal, Journey, Payday for Sony, and Wii U had the Zelda demo, and actual gameplay of all the 3DS games.

5133d ago
MrBeatdown5133d ago (Edited 5133d ago )

I noticed you threw Fable 3 in there. That came out last year. Or did you mean that awful-looking on-rails first-person Fable?

It's kind of funny watching you defend MS. They showed off four controller-based games, one of which was nothing more than a trailer for a game that is at least a year off. Sony easily topped that number entirely with games that were either demoed with in-game footage or that could be played by the media afterwards, they didn't even need to mention Twisted Metal or Last Guardian, and absolutely slaughtered MS when you factor in the fact that Sony's games were divided between PS3 and Vita, while MS only had to worry about 360.

That's a pretty weak showing for a company that two years ago at E3 was going on and on about exclusives and how they don't have to show games that aren't years off. Although, the irony of it is that MS actually announced Reach that year, which was well over a year away.

http://n4g.com/news/343976/...

Vicodin5133d ago

"Sony easily topped that number entirely with games that could be played by the media"

A direct result of Sony's massive 20-21 first party studios. Sony has more first party studios than Nintendo and Microsoft combined. Nintendo has about 10 and Microsoft is down to about 3.

SilentNegotiator5133d ago (Edited 5133d ago )

Microsoft:
The exact same thing as last year.
Kinect dominates as it takes on voice control, over-complicating simple controls, and destroys franchises like Fable while helping LucasArts make their worst SW game in years.

Nintendo:
A system with a lineup of games releasing this year.....in 2012, and an exclusive Lego version of GTA.
Some 3DS games; ports, games like Luigi's mansion that would be a better fit times a million on the Wii, and the typical Nintendo bunch, including Mario with his amazing 5 second hang-glider rides and wheel choices.
Wii had one game showcased. Yeah....one.

Sony:
Shooters for Ps3.
Some Move support and a crappy looking Move game.
But Vita was priced right, even if they didn't show off much new.

I'd say Sony won, with Vita being the only real highlight.

ChrisW5133d ago (Edited 5133d ago )

The Atari 2600 easily won E3 this year!!!

Shadowstar5133d ago (Edited 5133d ago )

@ ChrisW : Hells to the yeah! The museum was definitely the best part of E3 this year. (Even if I didn't get to play Asteroids, thanks to the line.)

Lawliet5133d ago

No clear winner, but we all know there's a loser, none other than Microsoft, truly a joke conference.

Why o why5133d ago (Edited 5133d ago )

'Thats just to match your list. Helps to loose the bias and actually watch E3 for the games. Get over yourself.'

yo try tooooo hard my friend. Just fess up. It was the worst of the three EVEN if the other two weren't that great

@ MrBeatdown

what a great and overlooked point. Sony had showings for two formats but you could argue MS had two formats to; 360 and kinect

AKS5133d ago

Regarding Microsoft's showing, I found myself one again thinking "Hmm, most of this doesn't really grab me, but I'm looking forward to Gears 3." This is a very familiar sentiment for me, as the overwhelming majority of my 360 gaming is with Gears and long gaps inbetween those games. I will buy Mass Effect 3 for PC. Dark Souls will be great for 360-only owners who missed Demon's Souls. Both 360 and PS3 owners are in for a treat with Dark Souls. It looks so much like Demon's Souls in style and presentation, which is a very, very good thing.

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 5133d ago
Rainstorm815133d ago

Id have to say sony as well, the surprise of E3 to me had to have been the price of the PSV...

Nintendo showed alot of thier hits for the 3DS and the Wii U doesnt look bad at all so they would be a close second

MS had Gears other than that it was very Kinect-y

E3 overall wasnt the "BEST E3 EVER!" but fairly solid and the big 3 would be in that order.

g0green5133d ago Show
Masta_Killa5133d ago

Make your peace with God people. The end is near. A positive PS3 article from IGN...

StbI9905133d ago

Dude, the vita won...vita WON, read with me yall, VIVAL LA VITA WON LOL.

It had me applauding at that prize, my family was like, wtf, and I like clap clap clap.

ReservoirDog3165133d ago (Edited 5133d ago )

The Sly Cooper 4 announcement Sony win E3 for me. Uncharted 3's a given even if there's spiders in it (*sigh*) and an Insomniac game's an instant buy when it's bundled with a sick Move bundle.

But Sly 4 was made for me.

edit: And of course the Vita seems coo.

coryok5133d ago

the majority of wii U games were ps3/360 trailers means that its probably going to b about the same potential as ps3/360 for the majority of the games lol

sony definitely won, they showed me games that i wanted to play. microsoft shoveled shit onto the stage and nintendo didnt show me much of anything, by not showing things and not showing the potential that can be had, theyre loosing. they should have had 15-20 games showing off wii us potential, instead they just show us what we've already seen and what i already bought, hint hint nintendo, im not going to be buying ports of games thaty i already have because you make a new console

tplarkin75133d ago

It's pretty sad when a company launches a console and can't win E3.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 5133d ago
-Alpha5133d ago (Edited 5133d ago )

I have to say that the PSVita has really grown on me over the last couple days.

Originally I wasn't that interested with the PSV and the E3 demoes didn't help (aside from LBP)

But, when taken as a whole, I was struck by Sound Shapes, Gravity, and SSD Delta. These games are original, make awesome use of the touchscreen, but more importantly they look like actual games designed for portable gaming.

Still think Nintendo had just as good as an E3 though. Wii U has really impressed me, and they revealed so many AAA titles for the 3DS' 2011 lineup.

jc485735133d ago

Nintendo just felt a little unorganized or should I say incomplete? 360 was just trying a little too hard to attract casual gamers. Sony on the other hand, well, I blame it on the lack of third party support.

morganfell5133d ago

I have to agree on that. I have long been familiar with Eve as Sci-Fi is my favorite genre, but never got into it. Dust 514 actually got me to pick up the Commander's Edition of Eve. The character maker in Incursion absolutely buries any character maker ...ever.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

http://www.youtube.com/resu...

It will be interesting to see how everything matches up in Dust. Sony had originally planned for a new Planetside and I guess this is their alternate....and much more appealing venture.

shadowknight2035132d ago

Certainly. What has me intrigued is that everything from Eve to Dust will be on 1 server. And essentially in order for both kinds of players on two different games to survive, we will have to rely on each other.

undercovrr5133d ago

All 3 conferences this year sucked IMO. E3 is not what is was in 07, 08 and 09.

Sony was the best of the worst for the reasons Colin stated - the games. Nintendo had no games (with the exception of Zelda) just a new empty console, and MS had wayyy to much Kinect that I got bored halfway through. Still, Sony should have spent more time showing footage of games we haven't seen much of (Twisted Metal, Last Guardian), and perhaps a surprise reveal.

Show all comments (65)
140°

Sony Faces Class Action in the Netherlands Over Allegedly Inflated PlayStation Store Prices

Mass Damage & Consumer Foundation in the Netherlands has filed a class action against Sony for inflating PlayStation Store prices.

dveio4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

My personal opinion:

Manufacturers and publishers have indeed inflated the industry.

From $700 million development costs for games like Call of Duty, to digital (store) prices for games and DLCs, online multiplayer fees on consoles (why can you play Helldivers 2 online for free on PC but not consoles?) or still preventing sell/lend digitally purchased games.

Sometime in the future, this bubble will collapse.

They should know better, but they just can't help themselves and suck even the last penny out of our wallets.

BeHunted4d ago

Because Sony knows people will be forced to pay those prices for single player and multiplayer games, not everyone prefers PC gaming. Sony also has a monopoly on PlayStation digital games. In 2019, they stopped allowing retailers and game key sellers to sell PlayStation digital games, making them available only through the official PlayStation Store

anast4d ago

The Dutch gov. wants a piece of the pie.

Eonjay4d ago

They should be suing the individual publishers increasing the prices to $80 instead of suing the store. There are plenty of publishers still selling game for like $50 with much success (like E33). But this proves that the publishers are the ones setting the prices.... so again nothing changes because they aren't even going after the main offender. How is suing Sony going to make Microsoft not charge $80 for the next COD? Sony being the number one store in the market doesn't mean that publisher have to charge us an arm and a leg. Again the industry is laughing at us because consumers never get real representation. Just these fake platitudes that are meaningless.

BeHunted4d ago

"How is suing Sony going to make Microsoft not charge $80 for the next COD"

Because Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly, I can purchase Call of Duty at a huge discount from CDKeys or other gaming retailers. The only way to purchase digital PlayStation games is through the PlayStation Store.

djl34854d ago

Weird, I swore GoW, Stellar Blade, Horizon Zero Dawn, TLoU, etc. were on the steam store....uh.....

BeHunted4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

@djI3485

I'm talking about PlayStation games that you can only purchase on PlayStation. I can purchase Steam and Epic games from 3rd party retailers and key stores.

"Sony to stop selling full-game download codes at retailers"

https://www.videogamer.com/...

Killer2020UK4d ago

About time. There is zero fair reason why digitally distributed products that you cannot recoup any value when you want to dispose of them, should be priced higher than that of physical copies that entail all of the costs and the benefits of owning.

Show all comments (12)
170°

Sony Aims To Sell 15 Million PS5 Units This Year, but Is Shifting Focus to Monthly Active Users

Sony CEO Hiroki Totoki and CFO Lin Tao talked about the state of the PlayStation business and the strategy and targets going forward, including how they're responding to the tariffs.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
1Victor45d ago

I wonder how the USA tariffs war will affect that projection. 🤔

S2Killinit45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

I think they take that into consideration when they announce their projections. Currently, after the xbox price increase, the PRO is cheaper than the series x! That is ridiculous, and it can’t last.

darthv7245d ago

you keep saying that but the price of a PS5 Pro is S699.99 (US) and the price of a Series X is $599.99 (US)

S2Killinit45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

The series x with 2 TB storage space is more expensive than PS5 PRO which also has 2 TB storage space.

darthv7245d ago (Edited 45d ago )

Oh so you are pitting a regular Pro with a special edition X... got it. If you are going so far as trying to compare apples to apples... please add in the optical drive and stand to the Pro. Seeing as the X has both of those by default.

I will help you if you are unable to do so.
PS5 Pro 2tb: $699.99, Optical Drive: $79.99, Stand: $29.99 = $809.97
Xbox Series X Galaxy Black Special Edition 2TB: $729.99

45d ago
S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

The PS5 PRO has 2TB storage. The series X with 2TB storage and much weaker, is… more expensive! So yeah, Im pointing out that fact.

Also, the PRO does not require a stand.

Ps: regular series 2TB is $749 (where did u get 729?)

darthv7244d ago

Its right here on the official XB site: https://www.xbox.com/en-US/...

Okay, so no stand for the Pro, but you might still want the optical drive. So $779.98 vs $729.99. A properly outfitted Pro is still more $$ than a 2tb X.

S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Do I need to mention that the series x is not nearly as powerful as the PS5 PRO?

And no, the PS5 PRO runs just fine without a drive, and people don’t have to buy the drive right away, assuming they want it.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 44d ago
drivxr45d ago

I wonder why they are shifting focus to MAU.

RaiderNation45d ago

Because that's where the real money is made, in microtransactions.

Profchaos45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

People are spending less time playing is a typical trigger for this.

The less time spent playing the less likely you are to spend more money on games and services including subs or even the next console.

Increased engagement equals more money.

45d ago
DarXyde45d ago

Same reason Microsoft does it: it looks better to investors and it's a solution when unit sales slow down.

Personally, I'm not a fan of this metric; and by using it, you're kind of signaling that you're moving into the "This is a PlayStation" era.

Z50144d ago

Because the PS4 also has users and not necessarily sales

Obscure_Observer42d ago

"I wonder why they are shifting focus to MAU."

Because they´d finally realized that MS wasn´t wrong after all.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 42d ago
45d ago
45d ago
310°

Sony Announces Large Profits Growth for PlayStation; Expects Further Wins in Current Fiscal Year

Sony announced its financial results for the fiscal year 2024, and things are certainly looking up, despite a decline in PS5 sales.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
CrimsonWing6945d ago

Expect sh*t to slow down if prices aren’t kept in check.

Redgrave45d ago

Who downvotes the truth?

Even PSN itself is too damn high.jpg

S2Killinit45d ago

Gamepass is already at 20$ per month if im not mistaken.

toxic-inferno45d ago

@neutralgamer1992

Not all of us. I'm a big PlayStation fan, and have been since the PSOne. But I can't begin to defend what's happening currently.

At least Nintendo release a large number of games from their major franchises. Sony is just not banking on their established franchises, and yet are raising prices. Not great.

S2Killinit45d ago

Im pretty sure we are going to see a price increase for PRO. I mean think about it, its currently cheaper than xbox series x! That cannot last.

Eonjay45d ago

I'm absolutely sure we will not see a price increase. I don't think we should 'expect' to see price increase because it just adds validity to what Nintendo and Microsoft have done.

darthv7245d ago (Edited 45d ago )

Sorry to pop that bubble but the Pro is not cheaper than a series x... generally speaking (like you are). It is cheaper than one specific version, and doing so by not including the optical drive and stand like the X has by default.

So keep on trying to convince people you are right when everyone knows it's quite the opposite. A stock Pro is $699.99 and a stock X is $599.99. A special edition galactic black 2tb X is $729.99. And if you really want to compare apples to apples... adding the aforementioned optical drive and stand brings that Pro to $809.97 and then they would be on equal footing.

Twisting truths to fit a narrative... I expect better from you S2.

S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

The PS5 PRO has 2TB storage. And the series X with 2TB is more expensive. Which in my opinion is insane conseidering how much more powerful the PRO is. The PS5PRO does not need a stand, it can be used without a stand.

TheKingKratos45d ago

So the Pro is not offering any push in sales at all ?

CrashMania45d ago

It's still an expensive, niche product ultimately. And they exceeded their sales projections for units sold by half a million.

lawox45d ago

"18.5 million units have been shipped during the full fiscal year. This is actually ahead of the 18 million units target set by the company."

They beat their yearly estimate. It's not broken down by device, but it's clearly performing well enough. Since it's been released it's consistently been the second best selling SKU on Amazon only after the the Slim with disc.

45d ago
Bathyj45d ago

18 million a year is in the toilet?
I remember when 10 was considered good
Hell Microsoft would take that right now.
Probably pay $100b for it.

45d ago
BeHunted45d ago

If their profits fall next quarter, we'll probably see more price hikes. I can't imagine having to pay £20 a month for PlayStation Plus.

S2Killinit45d ago

I think gamepass is already paying that much.

45d ago
drivxr45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

Decline in hardware sales.
Behind on lifetime sales and decline in first party sales.
Third party content and PSN came through to save the day.
Things will improve starting with the next Ghost game.

Hopefully a steady flow of first party content by end of '25

rlow145d ago (Edited 45d ago )

I guess you get downvoted for stating facts from Sony’s own lips. What I’m curious about is what their top games of the year were and how much Xbox games contributed to the increase?

CrashMania45d ago

Well, generally 3rd party publisher games contribute the most anyway, so no different to capcom, EA and so on contributing to this figure.

lawox45d ago

That's because the report is actually really good.

They beat the console sales estimate that they set last year March, they have increased users both due to the record numbers of PS4 users and strong PS5 sales which is leading to great profits in sales and user spend.

This report is about the financial health of the PlayStation brand and as a platform PlayStation is stronger than ever. Heck they even have Microsoft putting their biggest franchises on the platform.

45d ago
S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Well, the facts in the article are positive. Nothing wrong with his comment, but in my opinion it doesn't correctly indicate all the facts and nuances that give context to the reality of things. I downvoted for that only.

Make sense?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 44d ago
Lightning7745d ago

This is exactly what happened to Xbox year's ago. They had no first party and started seeing decline in 1st party sales, which effected their third party games which eventually effected their console sales. A slow decline across the board.

Calm down PS fans I'm not saying PS is becoming like old Xbox. I'm showing examples of the importance of first party output. Look how Xbox finally has compelling first party and things are on a up swing(despite years going on a downswing). I know thanks to PS releases which helps a ton, (which is why Xbox hardware only dropped 6% instead of 30+% like it usually does) The point still stands despite what Genz Trends may go, first party and compelling games sell hardware and software still. Sony's financial quarter is an example of this, of what lower First party output looks like.

No matter they'll be right back on track in due time any time especially with DS2 (not my type of game but I know many like it) and Yotei. They're not Xbox and let things get bad for so many years on end.

crazyCoconuts45d ago

"I'm showing examples of the importance of first party output. "
First party is mostly relevant for the sole purpose of creating EXCLUSIVES that are needed to stay competitive. With Xbox consoles collapsing and no more Xbox exclusives, first party is way less important. PlayStation as a platform now has free reign to profit without the high expense of needing exclusive first party titles.

red2tango45d ago

Sony has been very lazy with 1st party games compared to the PS4 era. And even the PS4 era was nothing compared to the PS3 era in terms of games.

S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

We have Ghost and Intergalactic coming. And then Marathon which is not exclusive to PlayStation. I think Covid and that chip shortage put a speedbump in game development because game manufacturers dont want even more risk that their game will arrive to too little hardware, but the games are starting to show up.

Lightning7745d ago

"With Xbox consoles collapsing and no more Xbox exclusives, first party is way less important."

Absolutely not. If that was the case then Nintendo would put Mario on Sega Genesis and Sonic on Super Nintendo. I know things are way different 30+ years later but not much has really changed in terms of exclusives and their impact on hardware. Especially early in the console life cycle.

Sony made all the money this quarter handover fist. Profits isn't a issue for them right now. I was just saying lower hardware sales and lower first party sales will hurt them or any console manufacturer of they don't have the compelling games in the long run. Just like it hurt Xbox. IF Sony keeps up not having lower first part output. Which we know they're not.

crazyCoconuts45d ago

Well no big exclusives in the last two years yet PS is doing great. What are people gonna do? Buy an Xbox?

S2Killinit44d ago

I agree with you. But they have had plenty of exclusives so far. Has it been ideal? Nope. I have a feeling we are seeing a resurgence with the effects of covid and that chip shortage now behind us.

Lightning7745d ago

No it's just like 360 where they had no games yet ppl still bought it because they sold ppl on the games early on that gen the fans were locked in and invested. They were riding the good will and was dubbed the shooter, racer box. The games dried up and they never recovered from it which hurt them in the long run. Same here with PS they still make the big bucks because they had games early on and the fans locked in and will continue to lock in for a little while longer despite lacking in first party.

S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

I agree. But the problem with xbox was that for some crazy reason MS thought game development wasnt all that important to a platform holder. They literally did not fund games with their own studios. When they lost marketshare they couldnt justify paying for exclusives with large install bases making it too expensive. That is not the scenario with PlayStation.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 44d ago
Show all comments (46)