oncnawan

PJ's

Why does the wiimote need aim assist? "Release then press and hold Z to quickly switch to a nearby target."

Actually, Archi, you can milk anything with nipples.

Actually, if they got Liam Neeson to play the part of Beast in the next X-Men movie, you'd have a pretty strong resemblance.

Gauss Hog, natch

"Lots of people don't have PS3's yet, and probably because of cost.
Not many people who want a 360 don't have one already."

Without any qualifiers, that is a ridiculous statement with no logical basis. You point to no reason why the 360 has a lower potential customer base. Now, adding "who want a 360 AT THE CURRENT PRICE don't ..." would make more sense, but still be fallacious, because the 360 is selling quite strongly at the moment.

What you fail to realize (and, from my experience reading this site, most gamers fail to realize) is that there are people at every price band between the current price and zero. Any price drop will reel in new customers. Unlike "gamers," who are a very small minority of potential consumers, most folks wait to purchase a game console until it is at a cost that fits their budget and value-to-cost requirements. What may seem even more amazing, is that the number of people who will buy increases with each lower price band.

Do you really think that if Microsoft matched this price drop with a $50 - $100 price drop of their own that people would not buy 360's in volumes never seen before?

Overkill or Marksman. Adrenaline rush reset timers on all abilities.

Just one more thing. What are the most iconic franchises for the PS2? GTA and FF, in my mind. That is perhaps the core of the problem. Sony's best franchises weren't Sony franchises. Nintendo is Mario, Xbox is Masterchief, Sony is ? That is perhaps the most easily understood symptom of Sony's problem, a large part of which is due to not owning the franchises for which the PS2 was most widely known.

Even if there are better franchises on the console, it needs to have a united face, one single spokesperson, a sole identity. MS and Nintendo get it. Sony hasn't. The same principle exists for franchises.

Try rereading boomsilent's comment without fanboy blinders on. Sony's leading franchises haven't put forth a distinctive, easily recognizable persona. Critically acclaimed does not equal easily recognized, or appealing to the masses. In order to succeed in the absence of such a presence, they need to heavily market their product.

Look at Halo, Mario, Sonic, Zelda, and Team Fortress 2. Show any gamer the lead character and they will recognize the franchise. Show them virtually any in-game character, and they will still recognize it. That is a distinctive art direction/presence.

By comparison, look at Uncharted, Resistance, inFamous. Who is the lead character? Some guy. Master Chief has his armor, Mario has his goofy proportions, Team Fortress 2 has its distinctive art direction.

Of all Sony's recent franchises that have been marketed heavily, the one with the most distinctive character, for me, is Killzone 2. Unfortuantely, the game has a checkered history, thanks to lackluster reception of the first game, and Sony's poor treatment of KZ2's promotional material at E3.

When you don't have a distinctive character, but you have a quality game, you build your brand around a trademark name or font. Examples are COD, Tom Clancy, Unreal Tournament, and FF. Put out a great game, give it lots of marketing, push recognition of the name, or the font, or the acronym, and you get an "exploitable franchise."

That is where Sony does poorly. They make poor choices for marketing foundations (batarang controller, spiderman font) and pursue a wacked out marketing plan (bathroom girl?). This, on top of poor market entry choices with their console have created problems for them.

Even console features are not capitalized in this way. Look at Xbox Live. Short name, great recognition factor. MS made a desirable online service last generation and marketed it heavily moving into this generation. The perception exists (with or without foundation) that Live is the place to go to play games online.

Yes, there is much more to this, like timing of certain franchise and console releases, and multiplayer focus operating as word of mouth advertising. But look at what boomsilent wrote from a business standpoint, and not from a gamer's standpoint and it makes a whole lotta sense.

Mike:

You're wrong. All console makers charge a royalty (MS charges $10, I believe) for each game sold by third party publishers.