E3: Play as Nathan Drake, Big Daddy in PlayStation All Stars

[Evil Smurf]

Yeah, 'cause copying Nintendo works well for you, Sony.

OH WAIT

Why did they have to make it look like a vibrator?

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Still waiting on a Cole McGrath reveal. I expect, from the amount of Ratchet and Clank stuff in the video and photos so far, that one or both of them will be playable. Wonder how many multiplatform characters will show up.

 

[Leemaster777]

While this does look like a blatant copy of SSB it still looks awesome. Too bad I just have an xbox.

I just have a PC! And the newest console I have is a GAMECUBE for crying out loud!

How do you think I feel!

Eh, don't complain TOO much. You get Mugen.

OT: I've been a bit on the fence with this game ever since they started showing gameplay, but the Big Daddy reveal has definitely started pushing me towards the "hyped" side of the fence.

Personally, I'm still waiting to see whether Kevin Butler ends up as the announcer, or as a playable character.

 

[Programmed_For_Damage]

Pioneering console MMOs,

*cough* Dreamcast *cough* Not to be petty but that console so rarely gets it's dues for innovation.

 

[BrotherRool]

Have you heard who is developing it? Have you seen the trailer they showed for it? Do you know how it's intended to function?

Let me answer these questions: it's being developed by the creators of Heavy Rain, and the developers state that it will have a similar feel. It also features a lot of elements that are extremely similar to several games that have already come out, Prototype among them, as well as elements from their last game, Heavy Rain.

"Beyond" is not a new IP. It's Heavy Rain's graphics mixed with elements of games you've already seen before. I'm disappointed that you've been so easily convinced that this game is anything special when you haven't even seen gameplay footage yet....in fact the devs made a point of refusing to show any.

Yes! Heavy Rain is one of my all time favourite games! That's why I'm in love with this one, because it's pretty clear that Quantic said they are going to be translating Heavy Rain to a new story, which is the idea, there's no focus on gameplay in a Heavy Rain style game, instead you choose a plot like you would a novel. This is them expanding into more interesting story directions than Heavy Rain which is why I love it?

And how would you tell if they showed gameplay? Most of Heavy Rain looks like this, except maybe with button prompts. If they've already established movement mechanics then we wouldn't even necessarily have that

And Heavy Rain is by far one of the most original games of all time (well as a genre together with the other Quantic Dream games) which is why I'm giving props to Sony for throwing so much weight behind this, it's thrown narrative to a whole new level and shown that the power of narrative in games is so good that it actually works even when the games narrative sucks.

Or they sought exclusivity on a game where you play the dream of a flower

Not certain what game this is, nor am I sure I'd ever be interested in playing it.

I should note that they also showcased the "Wonderbook" as an example of how creative and original they are. It's safe to say that any of the GOOD ideas they've put forward were taken from other IPs, and the ones they produce on their own have not exactly been knocking the socks of the collective gamer world right off.

The game is called, innovatively enough,Flower and it doesn't matter if you like it. In fact it doesn't matter if you like it at all, the whole point of trying new things is you've got to try things that may fail, I would not mark them down in creativity for trying a new game that no-one likes (*coughNobyNobyBoycough*) but as a matter of fact, although you personally may very well not enjoy it, it's got a Metacritic score of 87 (not that metacritic scores are particularly useful even for judging how many people love a game)
http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/flower
and is absolutely loved by some people, whats more it's frequently held up as a champion in the 'are games art debate'

The other thing about trying new things is you aim for niche demographics, you don't like Heavy Rain which is fair enough, and you don't like Flower, but if a company wanted to be loved by all people they would have to release fairly generic titles as most publishing companies do.

What I hope you realise is, although you do not love Heavy Rain, there are many many people who adore Heavy Rain and the game is for them and not for you, which is a process of innovation. You get left out, but maybe they'll make a game which you love and I hate, or maybe you prefer to stick to more mainstream titles.

I think objectively we can look at Flower and Heavy Rain as innovative, what you're talking about is whether they were successful or not and that's fair enough to debate.

Whoops. LBP 1 was certainly a good argument and I praise you for coming up with it....but we're talking about being original, and three sequels sort of drains from the notion of Sony being original.

Well as I said, I'm not arguing that Sony are completely creative, they've done a lot of derivative things. Particularly with motion controllers, what I'm arguing is that they aren't unoriginal or completely uninterested in innovation. There is a sliding scale and Sony is at neither extreme.

The truth is though, I don't know if you've played LBP2 but that in itself is a very innovative sequel. Firstly it's a sequel which meshes perfectly with all the original levels from the first game. How many sequels have been designed so you can play the first game and all it's player created levels as well?

What's more it brought to play a ridiculously powerful level editing software to the table, much better than LBP1 by a whole dimension. They created a sequel where you can make a 3d first-person shooter in your 2d platformer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_CKjtjjcoI

What's more they've released Media Molecule from making LBP games now and moved them onto new ideas. At the same time they're looking for interesting new directions in the genre and taking the already awesome ModNation Racer mechanics to a whole new level.

For that matter, describe me one game that plays like their flagship franchise, Uncharted. (there is precisely one other game, Enslaved, which copied Uncharted and from the looks of it Tomb Raider is going down that route too)

You are aware that the Tomb Raider franchise came first, and was the inspiration Naughty Dog used to create Uncharted in the first place....right?

But fine, I'll leave off Tomb Raider....how about "Last of Us"?

Unfair, you say, since Naughty Dog made it too? Okay, fine, then I'll note these three:
Assassin's Creed 2
Arkham Asylum
inFamous

All have a similar "feel" to them. Are they the exact same game? Well duh, obviously not. But you weren't asking for a clone of Uncharted, at least I assume not....since that would sort of make your point stupid, as it's like saying "Give me a game that plays EXACTLY like the last Mario game, not including other Mario games! AHA, YOU CAN'T, THAT MAKES IT ORIGINAL!".

The tomb raiders that came before the E3 reboot played nothing like Uncharted though. Neither do Assassins Creed 2, Arkham Asylum or inFamous, there are touches of similarity but they are open-world sandbox third person melee combat games, which differs hugely from a linear cinematic, cover-based set-piece shooter . I mean God of War is slightly similar. If you were to ask me for games like Mario, I'd name stuff like Alex Kidd, Wonder Boy and Sonic, 2d platformers that tried to clone Mario. If you meant the 3d games, then I'd say stuff like Crash Bandicoot, Ratchett and Clank etc althoguh I'd be loathe to call those games unoriginal.

The truth is, everyone copied Mario in the 90's, hardly anyone copies mario nowadays. For some reason very few Nintendo titles get copied. Perhaps because they've got a fereverent fanbase but in a surprisingly niche nostalgic way.

inFamous was also a Sony product. And I'm surprised how much the Last of Us is innovating, as I said I'm not out to prove Sony is original, just that they're capable of originality. I think the model of 1.Come up with an idea. 2. Iterate on idea., is a very worthwhile strategy. If Uncharted had stopped at 1 we'd never have seen the potential 2 released, (3 went too far, they need a break, I'd say 3 was a black mark of unoriginality, even then they were trying new narrative devices)

So if you're talking "similar style", then there's actually quite a few such games on the market, many of them AAA titles. "Third person perspective game with shooting and melee combat elements, vivid scenery, and puzzles" isn't exactly a unique subgenre these days. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish with this argument.

Okay I'm stuck, name a game (and it has to come before Uncharted, else they probably copied Uncharted). I'd actually genuinely love you too, because I love the games and I'm looking forward to the new Tomb Raider taking on it's style.

On the technical side, how about allowing Steam to run on consoles?

Please tell me you're kidding.

Or creating cross-platform games?

....you're not kidding, are you?
[/quote]Why? Other people haven't done it? As I said innovation =/= good. In fact it means making unsafe risky things which could well be bad. I don't think either of those things were bad though.

Pioneering console MMOs

Which still haven't been verified as a viable market to begin with.

If this is sarcasm, well it's still trying something different with the idea. Other people haven't done it. If this isn't sarcasm, that's the point of innovation

Creating a game where you play as a photographer taking after animals.

Yep, never seen that before!

I don't think it can be argued that Afrika is secretly just a Pokeman snap clone Else we should call all games Pong clones. Even if it was, Pokeman snap isn't exactly the broadest genre around and expanding on it would be an innovative idea

Making a card game where you scan the cards in with a Playstation Eye

Er, card scanning technology for video games has been in existence for decades. Hell, there was an entire console dedicated to it (though it's historically considered one of the worst consoles ever). I do hope you're not trying to suggest that Sony was the first to come up with the idea of video games that scan cards, because that would be a very silly point to make.

This is completely fair, didn't know that people had done that before. I just made a very silly point

Follow that up with a game that's like ICO, Shadow of the Colossus

I can't find one that's older than ICO, but I can find one that's newer: Journey.

The Sony backed exclusive? Even if Journey had been made by someone else it wouldn't have stopped the originals from being innovative I think you might be a little allergic to sequels.

Even taking a broad view. ICO, Shadow of the Colossus and Journey are nothing like each other in any way except that they're innovative games, based on quiet emotional puzzles. It's not like they're sequels to each other, or copying mechanics, or setting, or story.

Now I'm not saying that Sony is a particularly original company, just that they have and will shown interest in some stunningly original things and games, if you would like to reformulate you position and come up with a consistent standpoint I'm happy to talk about that and we can decide how original Sony are as a company in a meaningful way.

I think I'll pass on that offer. Most of your points were based on faulty information or are pretty readily dismissed as minor "innovation" at best. I'm not sure I want to continue a conversation with someone who believes that all of the statements above represent how truly "original" Sony is.

I'm truly sorry I've offended you, I didn't mean to and it's clear that Sony being a hack is very important to you. But if you look at the bit you quoted, I even stated right there 'I'm not saying Sony is a particularly orginal company' and now you've said you won't discuss things with people who believes that the statements represent how original Sony is

Luckily I'm not that person, so if you want we can carry on talking

I like how your last paragraph asked me to come up with a consistent viewpoint, and then you promptly shifted gears from "Sony is TOTALLY original!" to "so what if this isn't original? It's cool!".

And my point is "Fine, it's cool. But stop saying it's original (it's not) and stop saying that it's not a blatant cash-in on the success of Smash Bros (it is)."

I wasn't saying that I'm saying this particular game is a cash in, and I'm cool with that I was responding to someone saying that Sony are completely uniterested in orginality in every way and proving that's true. I then followed that up with a, even if it is true, it wouldn't matter.

Don't know what gameplay footage you've watched, but I watched their live demo at E3 and it's about as carbon copy of Brawl as you can get. Even the stage they selected for their demo felt like Final Destination with a new coat of paint.

The dev's gave a quite overview of how the gameplay worked, no rings out, not sapping health, instead it's a Dissidia system where attacking builds up your metre and taking damage increases it. => You don't want to last tap the weaker people, but take on the stronger people, which is a more Dissidia style mechanic than Brawl.


Anyway I hope you didn't read any aggression into this on my part I take no offence and you've shown me HyperScan

 

[SilverBullets000]

Woah, that was a long one.

I agree with the "Book of Spells," comment holeheartedly.

I'm glad, because that thing may go down in history as the worst game I've ever seen.

At least Heavy Rain was trying.

Yeah. Both games have very different problems, but at least Heavy Rain could tell you a decent story.
Heavy Rain=God of War quicktime events throughout.
Book of Splls=Augmented reality book that doesn't do anything.

As for not trying to differentiate from Smash Brothers and lacking that crazy wacky creativitity, what would you have rathered them do with it? I'm not going to say that there isn't any way that they can improve it, but Super Smash Brothers has a really well implemented (though a bit cluster-fuckish) combat system already.

I didn't say they couldn't copy Brawl.

I said they couldn't copy Brawl and then try to pretend that it was a brand new 100% original idea. Because then they're just lying to everyone, themselves especially.

Or the lawyers to prevent a lawsuit. Can't say I disagree with you, though.

Besides, it does look as if they change quite a few features via life bars and stages that mash-up. So you can't say they aren't trying to put their own spin on it.

Those aren't life bars, they're some sort of "build up meters" used for the Super Attack, if I'm remembering what the demo guy at E3 said correctly.

Brawl had partially-breakable objects and collapsing devices on stages, too.

Clearly I need to do more research on the game myself. My apologies and thanks for setting that straight.
That does show that they are changing some things about it. I do agree that they can't claim that it's 100% different than Brawl or original, as you've pointed out earlier, but at least they aren't ripping off the Smash Ball.
Last sentance is true as well, but Smash Bros didn't have the stages combine.

And then they'd have yet another fighting game, just as a crossover. You've got your lens a little too focused on the fact that they're copying Nintendo here. Yes, it's blantant, but that doesn't mean it won't work or be any different.

Because they've shown a tendency in recent years to copy their more successful competitor, that's why.

Again, I can't deny this. I've seen the horrible Poke'mon wannabes that Sony put on the PSP, I do know what you're talking about.
This one just feels different to me. Yeah, they're still ripping Nintendo off, but at least this one will be more fun, albeit unoriginal. I can also see why claiming it to be original would annoy you since it isn't, but admiting that it isn't would probably bring down the wrath of Nintendo lawyers.

You're right here, in a way. However, the only other way I could have seen them do this is to copy SoulCalibur, Tekken, Virtua Fighter, Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter, and all the other fighting games that already exist. We don't bat an eye at them because that kind of fighting has been tweaked and redone so many times that we don't care which is copying which, as long as it's fun. That's why I'm not so angry about them blatantly ripping off Nintendo: I like the Nintendo game too.

I'm not even angry. I'm being so sincere right now.

Sorry about that. Hard for me to tell tone when reading.

I just don't like people claiming that they've created a brand new game. Because, let's be honest, they haven't. They took an existing game and spun it their own way.

You're correct. I don't know the legality of videogames, so I can't tell if saying, "Yeah, we totally took this from Smash Brothers, bro," would land them in hot water or not, but I get the feeling that it would.
Still, it is an obvious ripoff, small new mechanics aside. No one is questioning that.

Even then, you act as if it's a 100% wholesale rip off. There are bound to be minor differences here and there, cast not withstanding. My advice is to at least wait until the game comes out and you've seen some actual gameplay before jumping on the SSB hate wagon.

I watched their demo at E3. It plays EXACTLY like Brawl does. Unless the demo at E3 is nothing like the final product, it's safe to say they will be pretty darn similar titles

Doubtful, so yeah, they will be darn similar titles.

Point: So, yeah, now that I understand where you're coming from, I get what you mean. You aren't saying thay can't copy Brawl, but you wouldn't mind it if they were at least more honest about doing it.

 

[Don Savik]

Blatant rip off to steal Nintendo's success? I know how evil we think corporations are, but I'll let this generalization go until I see actual words out of Sony executives mouths.

A higher fidelity smash bros with cooler multi-game levels and a better roster besides goddam mario and friends? What is wrong with this exactly? Why are we against MORE smash bros?

It seems like a bunch of whiny fanboys clinging to brand loyalty if you ask me. Its possible to like BOTH games, did you guys know that?

I mean, does it not look as fun as "Fox only, final destination, no items" battles?

 

[Druyn]

While I won't be buying this because I'm not a fan of this kind of game, and also to a lesser extent I don't own a PS3 or PSP, I thought this was going to be big PS characters? I mean, even Snake started out as a PS character and just grew into other consoles as he went along. Big Dadies just kind of sit right in that middle ground of being iconic and recognizable, but not to either console in particular.

 

[K4RN4GE911]

Well, I really hope they don't forget about Spyro and Crash to put in. They better not put in the abomination that is the new Spyro though.

Well, as much as I love the original 90's Spyro, I believe the Legend version would fit right in.

I mean, think about it: He has a pretty decent moveset when it comes to combos. He has four different breath attacks, (Fire, Electricity, Ice, and Earth) and let's not forget Dark Spyro. Just the thought alone on turning your enemies to stone, then shattering them to bits is enough to send my heart aflutter.

 

[Racecarlock]

Kind of looks like Super Smash Bros with different skins.

Oh really? I couldn't tell, they were being so incredibly subtle about it.

Seriously though, obvious fact is obvious.

 

[Necabo]

Kind of looks like Super Smash Bros with different skins.

Oh really? I couldn't tell, they were being so incredibly subtle about it.

Seriously though, obvious fact is obvious.

http://i45.tinypic.com/14nmqdj.jpg
yeah, you could probably mod SBB to AllStars

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

Didn't bioshock start out as a windows/xbox only game?

Dafuq did I just read anyway "playstation allstars"

The only guys I think regularly qualify for that are Spyro , Crash Bandicoot and euhm... well you get my point, Solid snake and Big daddy aren't Playstation exclusive characters.

 

[BrotherRool]

Pioneering console MMOs,

*cough* Dreamcast *cough* Not to be petty but that console so rarely gets it's dues for innovation.

Dude if there was an innovation award and Dreamcast turned up, everybody else would immediately go home. It's ridiculous how much the Dreamcast managed to change the industry without actually being successful

 

[Quiet Stranger]

Just PLEASE take out Fat Princess and put a more deserving character in and I WILL buy it day one.

I get the feeling that "Fat Princess" is the Kirby of All Stars Battle Royale... Except while Kirby is a cute little puffball that costs you dearly for underestimating it, this is... a fat "princess"...

No, Fat Princess is more the...okay well I don't know but she's most certainly not the Kirby of Battle all stars

 

[Sheo_Dagana]

I honestly don't care if Nintendo did it first. That is like saying "Simpson's did it!" I suppose Sonic was just a rip off of Mario, right?

If Big Daddies are playable, and that's not exclusive to Sony, maybe that means that all bets are off on who could end up in the game. That gives this game's roster an exciting amount of potential. I wasn't surprised at all when Nathan Drake was announced, but I was seriously not expecting to see a Big Daddy. Hopefully we'll see Mega Man X or a Final Fantasy character (not Lightening) in future announcements.

 

[BrotherRool]

Precisely, so you're even admitting that Beyond isn't really a "new" game so much as "Heavy Rain 2" with a new storyline. That, I would point out, isn't really "innovative".

I think objectively we can look at Flower and Heavy Rain as innovative, what you're talking about is whether they were successful or not and that's fair enough to debate.

Heavy Rain's focus on story and QTE over normal gameplay is actually a pretty standard staple of a number of titles, such as Indigo Prophecy. It's not particularly innovative or original so much as it is a very nice looking NEW version of those same old flavors, and it benefits from not having a plot that seems to be running on acid for the last hour of gameplay.

So I'm hesitant to claim that calling Heavy Rain "one of the most original games of all time" is an "objective" standpoint. It's more the sort of standpoint that you'd hear from a fan of the game....which you have admitted to being. So your argument is certainly a questionable one.

I think what I feel is more because they're still supporting this, even though it hasn't become widely industry supported. Maybe there's a difference between innovative and having an interest in originality? Because now you've pointed it out, Beyond isn't innovative, but it does show that Sony have a strong interest in originality because they supporting a genre that no-one else is exploring.

I moved your other quote up here, because it's relevant. Indigo Prophecy is the only other game like Heavy Rain and that's because it was also made by Quantic Dream which is why I tried to say 'Quantic Dream games' at points instead of just Heavy Rain. They can really be looked as a game and two sequels slowly trying to create their own corner of the gaming world

And how would you tell if they showed gameplay? Most of Heavy Rain looks like this, except maybe with button prompts. If they've already established movement mechanics then we wouldn't even necessarily have that

No QTE prompts. It was either a CGI trailer or just cutscene footage. Neither is a particularly great way to sell a game.

But parts of Heavy Rain where you were just walking wouldn't show prompts anyway. What I suspect, because this game is in development, that they're blocking out the animation and story and the prompts will come later on in the cycle. There was very little in the way of actual cutscene in Heavy Rain at any time

And Heavy Rain is by far one of the most original games of all time (well as a genre together with the other Quantic Dream games)

....
That's it then, gaming is dead. Like rap. It had a good run, but all things must come to an end. Pack up your things people, nothing left to see here.[/quote[

This I'm going to challenge you on if it's okay, you were right about a lot of the other stuff, but originality is not related to quality in any way. Quantic Dream's game are factually original because no-one has tried anything close to a game that plays the way theirs does. And even if we just looked at the story, its not a story people have tried to tell.

Heck a game which makes you continue with the story if you die is something pretty darn original in the games industry

which is why I'm giving props to Sony for throwing so much weight behind this, it's thrown narrative to a whole new level and shown that the power of narrative in games is so good that it actually works even when the games narrative sucks.

You can have a powerful narrative and still have good gameplay. Heavy Rain throws out the second part, which is why it may well be a fantastic narrative, but it remains a TERRIBLE example of a game. It's an 'interactive movie', perhaps, but that's really all that can be said for it. It seems like Quintic wants to create movies, and they should just go ahead and do that if that's their aim. But video games have to be interactive, and token QTE events don't fit that bill.

This is actually interesting, because it's exactly the other way round. Heavy Rains story sucks, it's pretty common for even the people to love it to admit that it's story sucks. That's what Yahtzee said, that's what most of the reviews you'll see on sites say (except the people like you, who didn't like it)

There have been whole articles purely on the fact Heavy Rain's story sucks. The world isn't realistic, filled with mass murders, there are gaping plots holes etc...

The point is that the gameplay is such a good way of getting people engaged with the story, that it makes a very mediocre story seem amazing.

The thing is, you're putting it in a box and then telling it off, because it doesn't fit in your box. Why should we care if it's a game or not? What earthly difference does that make? It's just a label.

It's very clearly not a film, it's core dynamic involves player guided interaction with the world. It's much more a game even than something like Dear Esther and if you want to give it a different label, that's fine, but it doesn't change that fact that it's not an experience you could ever have on anything but some sort of gaming system.

The truth is that gaming is a huge medium, several factors larger than any other medium proceeding it. In fact you can view films and novels as a 2 dimensional slice on the game spectrum. It results in games being able to engage players in all sorts of ways. Clearly your key engagement isn't narrative and you prefer the areas of games that fufill the challenge seeking/problem solving parts of your mind. But that's only one small section of gaming. There's the drive of narrative, or the drive of exploration etc... Super Mario Brothers and Uncharted for example come from completely different areas.

And Heavy Rain is in the extreme of this position, it's really nothing like a film or a tv show and there's no real way you can't define it as a game. Actions happening according to player input is the definition of a game and Heavy Rain does that. All games at all times have always disguised the lack of player agency. Did you know that if you twiddle a thumbstick in a circle, you aren't actually making a circular motion, but game designers have spent effort and time, created an action on screen that responds circularly, so you think you're making a circular motion.

So despite the fact you don't enjoy Heavy Rain, that you don't play games for Heavy Rain's type of satisfaction, that really has no bearing on whether other people do. I've played Heavy Rain. Trying to not class it as a game is really no different than throwing out GTA as the definition of a game, because it's a sandbox and you enhoy scripted linear experiences/

Player-guided stories have an unbelievable amount of power, regardless of what you want to label it as, you know how stories do all sorts of tricks to make you empathise with their fictional characters? It turns out that giving the player responsibility over some of that characters actions and putting success and failure on the burden of the player is ridiculously good at doing that.

I don't disagree. Though I don't believe a game deserves some sort of merit badge for being original, either. It's okay to be new and it's okay to be a clone, so long as you do a good job and make it your own piece. People should worry less about this sort of thing.

I agree completely It is good to strike out for new things, but taking an idea that people enjoy and making something with it that people can enjoy is cool I just think that Sony have done some original things at points of their career

Well as I said, I'm not arguing that Sony are completely creative, they've done a lot of derivative things. Particularly with motion controllers, what I'm arguing is that they aren't unoriginal or completely uninterested in innovation. There is a sliding scale and Sony is at neither extreme.

I don't recall claiming they were. What I did say was that Sony's recent ideas tend to be taken from its competition, and that many of its own ideas have been dismal failures. There are certainly exceptions to every rule, but the trend is undeniable.

Sony has absolutely no interest in being original.

Yeah this is what I've been responding too . In fact in my first post, this and one other line, is all I quoted, because that's what I was responding too. I don't disagree with your statement as you put it now, except within the PS3's lifespan, which is 6 years I believe,
they've created 4 IP's which have been successful that have not been blatantly borrowed from the competition. (Those are Little Big Planet, inFamous, Uncharted, Resistance(this one's a bit borderline), then maybe 3-4 that weren't failures but also weren't particularly successful (Warhawk, Siren: Blood Curse, Folklore, MAG etc) and encouraged some very successful original games (Demons Souls, Valkyria Chroncles) And made a lot of very original very successful PSN games, where it's easy to take risks (Flower, Journey, Flow, PixelJunk Eden, PixelJunk Shooter, Fat Princess, etc)

That's no where near enough to be an known innovator, but I wouldn't say that it was so little it counts as some undeniable trend either. Maybe if you shortened the gap instead of last 6 years to last 3 years, but we've still got The Last Guardian, The Last of Us etc which are original IPs even if made by studios that have made similar games. Certainly haven't been blatantly ripped of the competition.

I think if you were to look at EA, Activision, Microsoft, Nintendo, THQ within the same 6 years, 3 years time spans then you would find the trends to be very similar.

I think what Sony have done, have had a few exceptionally obvious blatant rip-offs that have failed miserably. These would be : Six-Axis motion control, Whatever those new motion controllers are meant to be and this game now. That's considerably less than the good things they have done, but much worse than either Microsoft or Nintendo.

I have not played it, but my point was more that it's hard to argue it as a new game when it's a sequel. It may have changed the formula, but you sort of have to change quite a lot before you're looking at a totally different game. And LBP2 really doesn't go quite that far.

Although you haven't played it? To be fair I would consider you right, Media Molecule weren't too happy about it and they're happier now they can go and do something new with Sony's blessing again.

The tomb raiders that came before the E3 reboot played nothing like Uncharted though. Neither do Assassins Creed 2, Arkham Asylum or inFamous, there are touches of similarity but they are open-world sandbox third person melee combat games, which differs hugely from a linear cinematic, cover-based set-piece shooter .

Really, not really. You're trying to create a lot of distinctions here to subdivide them but there are enough similarities that they fall into very common genre and subgenre bins.

No, not only were all those games released after the original Uncharted, so would take their inspiration from Uncharted not the other way round. If we poll people inFamous, Arkhum Asylum and AC2 are not similar to Uncharted.

Look Uncharted is famous for being a linear game based around set pieces. It's what Uncharted is. Other than that, it's also famous for cover-based shooting and cutscene told stories. Assassins Creed does none of these things, which you will spend the majority of Uncharted doing.

Similarities between AC2, inFamous and Uncharted, you can climb on stuff. With Arkhum Asylum you can't even do that!

And I'm surprised how much the Last of Us is innovating, as I said I'm not out to prove Sony is original, just that they're capable of originality.

You're using the word "innovation" an awful lot and I'm not sure you're aware what it means. Are you sure you're not a Sony exec?

Oh my gosh yes I am! You were completely right, I don't actually have an opinon, and I'm glad you've shown me the error of my ways I was actually a paid Sony executive and I'm was burning inside with the disgust of the untruths that I was saying, thank you for giving me a chance to relieve myself of that My every day is misery and you've given me the one light to escape my bleak executive life
/ Sorry you were right, in fact I was using the word innovation so much, it was almost as if were debating the innovative properties of a company?

(I couldn't decide which snark I wanted to use )

Also, correction: It's not a "Sony backed exclusive" in anything except funding. It's made by an independent developer under contract with Sony.[/quote
Definition of 'publisher backed' = funded by

I'm being innovative?

Please stop using this term as you clearly don't know its proper meaning.

Sorry, I was always bullied at school for my poor English schools, it's nice to meet someone who can show me the true way

I wasn't saying that I'm saying this particular game is a cash in, and I'm cool with that

Then stop trying to call Sony innovative for thinking of it, and then when people point out that this is obviously absurd, you go on to quote how great Sony is at innovating the industry. You truly sound like Sony wrote your replies for you.

I'm sorry but I didn't say this particular game was innovative, I said others were I feel we've been speaking at cross purposes

 

[BrotherRool]

EDIT

-SNIP-

Looking back I've realised that I started this with an awful tone and have done nothing but disturb you and myself. I'm sorry for the way I've taken this conversation and the things I've said in it and ruined any chance of productivity with the way I've gone about this. Would it be okay if we agree to differ here?