• We are delighted to introduce GiftBot 2.0, the next generation of our popular gifting feature. To celebrate, we'll be giving away some incredible prizes over the coming weeks in one big Giveaway Extravaganza!

One of Sony's biggest problems is the lack of an big IP with merchandising. Will it change with the PS5?

OP
OP
plow

plow

Member
Oct 28, 2017
538
It seems OP mislead is personal perception about such stuff to the reality of the things. The Last of Us sold more than any single Halo, as someone as remembered, but because Halo has more action figure, comic copyright and so on, that's bad for the sony future. What a weird thread.
Please show me where in my OP or in any part of my comments i said "that's bad for Sony's future".
Stop putting things in my mouth. Thank you very much.

Apparently saying "Sony has a problem" is equal to "Sony is doomed" for you. It's simply impossible to argue in a good faith with posts like these.
 

RestEerie

Member
Aug 20, 2018
6,506
By OP's perspective, rockstar is fucked. I'm not seeing any GTA or RDR plushies and keychains.

I want my Nico punching bag.
 

Manmademan

Member
Aug 6, 2018
5,208
Sony foolishly sold the merchandising rights to Spider-Man back to Marvel in 2011 because electronics, PlayStation included, were struggling and they needed cash. Marvel makes more money off every new Spider-Man film than Sony does. Marvel is likely making more off the game than Sony does.
It wasn't foolish at all. Sony's willingness to play ball with Marvel and renegotiate that deal put them in a good position to work with Feige on Homecoming and FFH.

Also, Marvel REALLY wanted those merch rights back. Fox decided to be a pain in the ass instead of renegotiating deals and playing ball- Marvel simply decided to stop selling merch for all characters fox controlled. Not just "movie related" merch, virtually all of it.
 

Fastidioso

Member
Nov 3, 2017
2,791
Please show me where in my OP or in any part of my comments i said "that's bad for Sony's future".
Stop putting things in my mouth. Thank you very much.

Apparently saying "Sony has a problem" is equal to "Sony is doomed" for you. It's simply impossible to argue in a good faith with posts like these.
So if it's not bad for the sony future in what way is a problem or a biggest problem for sony? Be clear. Because until now your op is very confusing and pointless.
P.S.
I wouldn't use Wikipedia as source for such stuff because isn't it exactly trustworthy for everything.
 
Last edited:

MultiMoo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,652
Silicon Valley
Merch exists, but Sony doesn't really put a focus on developing IP well suited to pushing it.

A good example is Pixar's CARS. That series seems designed from the ground up to push as much licensed product as possible via kid friendly characters, even if the movies themselves were bottom tier.
I never said they do, only that merchandise obviously sells because there are loads you can't even buy anymore unless you go to Ebay.

However, they DID have stuff like LBP that could have made a buttload more, had it been capitalized on. There are also more chances in the future to have a game where merch is a big part of the income, though as many have said Sony doesn't really care since the games are what they sell to promote PlayStation.

You can find all sorts of cool merch in US and especially UK, and then it's even crazier in Japan where they have stuff most people have no idea exist.

One of my favorite shops is actually Insert Coin. Got a reversible PlayStation jacket from there, as well as a symbol patterned black shirt.





I have a God of War and Kojima Productions long-sleeve shirts from them as well.

They also have some really nice ones for other PlayStation IP, like this:



 

Ascenion

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,807
Charlotte NC
It wasn't foolish at all. Sony's willingness to play ball with Marvel and renegotiate that deal put them in a good position to work with Feige on Homecoming and FFH.

Also, Marvel REALLY wanted those merch rights back. Fox decided to be a pain in the ass instead of renegotiating deals and playing ball- Marvel simply decided to stop selling merch for all characters fox controlled. Not just "movie related" merch, virtually all of it.
Sony admitted in 2017 that selling the merch rights was a bad idea. They had less leverage going into MCU discussions since if they make a new Spider-Man film at all they Have to go to marvel to make the back end money and toys which a Spider-Man movie has to have. Spider-Man’s success is wholly dependent on staying in Marvel’s good graces at this point. A non MCU Spidey would fail at this point.
 

Moirayn

Member
Nov 7, 2018
660
It's interesting looking at this thread. I see a lot of people attacking the premise that this is one of Sony's "biggest problems", but while skimming thru I don't see many suggestions as to what other big problems Sony has. Maybe the phrasing is slightly off, but given the OP says english isn't their native language I think people are getting stuck on that.

Playstation is a remarkably strong brand. There are some areas where they may be lagging behind their competitors (notably crossplay on certain games), but outside of that & improving/expanding the PS Now service for streaming, they don't have many other "problems" to speak of.

I think there's something to be said for Playstation lacking characters that are bigger than gaming. I know for one I always thought of Playstation just as the system that gets Final Fantasy while growing up. The various "mascot" characters never really ended up turning into long running franchises, and the characters I once associated with playstation like Lara Croft & Crash, are now multiplat. Obviously Sony overcomes this every generation, but it would be scary to think how dominant Playstation could be if they had characters like Mario that transcend the medium. The amount of money they could make from licensing stuff would be insane, and could then be funneled back into game development.

Either way, Playstation is doing great as is, but it's not like they couldn't improve in some areas. I think this is clearly one of them, even if it's not something that everyone on an enthusiast forum will necessarily care about.
 

Bundy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,574
I’m guessing OP wants it to be more ubiquitous? Like you walk in Walmart or Target and Pokemon, Mario, Halo, Minecraft it’s in your face in the toy isle and then in the gaming section.
I've never walked into a Target and saw some "in your face" Halo toy isles. But maybe that's just me.
Your post implied that it's Sony who spend resources in developing and distributing/selling extension products like merchandising based off its IPs. It's not. If you don't know how this business works it is fine, you can always learn something.
The OP implies that not having some merch behemot like Pokemon is "one of Sony's biggest problems". Which means Sony should invest $ to copy IPs like Mario, Pokemon or Minecraft, so they can sell trading cards later on. You first have to invest money to make this happen. If you don't know how this business works it is fine, you can always learn something.
Should Sony try to copy that? No. Is it one of Sony's biggest problems? No. Should they use the money to double-down on stuff they're good at? Yes. And btw. that's exactly what they are doing right now.
 

Fastidioso

Member
Nov 3, 2017
2,791
It's interesting looking at this thread. I see a lot of people attacking the premise that this is one of Sony's "biggest problems", but while skimming thru I don't see many suggestions as to what other big problems Sony has. Maybe the phrasing is slightly off, but given the OP says english isn't their native language I think people are getting stuck on that.

Playstation is a remarkably strong brand. There are some areas where they may be lagging behind their competitors (notably crossplay on certain games), but outside of that & improving/expanding the PS Now service for streaming, they don't have many other "problems" to speak of.

I think there's something to be said for Playstation lacking characters that are bigger than gaming. I know for one I always thought of Playstation just as the system that gets Final Fantasy while growing up. The various "mascot" characters never really ended up turning into long running franchises, and the characters I once associated with playstation like Lara Croft & Crash, are now multiplat. Obviously Sony overcomes this every generation, but it would be scary to think how dominant Playstation could be if they had characters like Mario that transcend the medium. The amount of money they could make from licensing stuff would be insane, and could then be funneled back into game development.

Either way, Playstation is doing great as is, but it's not like they couldn't improve in some areas. I think this is clearly one of them, even if it's not something that everyone on an enthusiast forum will necessarily care about.
Never thought the thread was about Sony problems. It has surely his problems. No refunding is one and the net infrastructure is tragic (psnow is embarassing more than a time but it's just the more evident, there are many others).
Reading the OP, the lack of a big IP outside the console brand, it's one of their biggest issue. For me what he said is simply not true (because they are merchandising tons of stuff or maybe I don't understand what OP meant exactly) and what he trying to argue seems more pretentious than a true argue when he is called to clarify himself . Now if he want to discuss to other "real" issues, that's OK.
 
Last edited:

Manmademan

Member
Aug 6, 2018
5,208
I never said they do, only that merchandise obviously sells because there are loads you can't even buy anymore unless you go to Ebay.

However, they DID have stuff like LBP that could have made a buttload more, had it been capitalized on.
Does merch sell? kinda. It's out there, but it's not really a significant revenue driver. Superfans buy that, and virtually no one else.
Let's look at this a different way.




For the year ending 2018, The Walt Disney company made 1.59B in consumer product revenue at retail. DISNEY. (licensing and publishing is stuff like games, etc).

For comparison, this is where Sony made it's revenue in 2016 (couldn't find a more recent chart that wasn't in Yen)



This was *2016*. For FY 2018 Sony's games and network services revenue was 20.8 Billion, not 13 Billion.


Any revenue from merchandising Playstation IP like Sackboys, Sly Coopers, or Ratchet and Clanks would have been a rounding error barely worth the effort in comparison to what the Playstation business brings in without them.
 

wBENDERw

Member
Oct 27, 2017
359
i don't know man i don't want more "stuff" personally

will it change with ps5 probably not because the effort is in the game, not merchandise
 

Manmademan

Member
Aug 6, 2018
5,208
Sony admitted in 2017 that selling the merch rights was a bad idea.
It depends on what Marvel would have done if they hadn't sold them back. It's doubtful they would have survived the kind of acrimonious relationship Marvel had with Fox, and it's hard to see the Sony/MCU partnership happening. More revenue is always bettter than less and from that perspective it was a mistake, but trying to project the marvel/sony relationship had they NOT done that is a harder call.

As pointed out, Disney/Marvel was more than willing to simply cut all merchandise for the Xmen and FF down to zero for years to force Fox's hand. They could have easily done the same for Spidey to Sony, leaving Sony exactly where they are right now.

Spider-Man’s success is wholly dependent on staying in Marvel’s good graces at this point. A non MCU Spidey would fail at this point.


$856 Million WW at the box office.
 

Heshinsi

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,966
Sony game series like Uncharted, Last of Us, Horizon, etc, started in 07, 13, and 17 respectively. Two of those game franchises only have one game released for them. God of War is their other big one, but I’m sure the newest game is the best selling one of the series.

How are you comparing some of these franchises to IPs that have been around for decades?
 

fourfourfun

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,105
England
I feel like the word "problem" is a misnomer here. Perhaps it should be Sony's biggest opportunity. Because there certainly is a world to expand into there.
 

sfortunato

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,629
Italy
The OP implies that not having some merch behemot like Pokemon is "one of Sony's biggest problems". Which means Sony should invest $ to copy IPs like Mario, Pokemon or Minecraft, so they can sell trading cards later on. You first have to invest money to make this happen. If you don't know how this business works it is fine, you can always learn something.
Should Sony try to copy that? No. Is it one of Sony's biggest problems? No. Should they use the money to double-down on stuff they're good at? Yes. And btw. that's exactly what they are doing right now.
I was just counter-arguing your idea that Sony should divert resources to such things. They needn't to. They can license out. Of course they should try more as every companies should. Business diversification is a good thing.
 

Tregard

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,774
I feel like they swung for the fences on this with LittleBigPlanet, and it almost worked. If they had another go with Sackboy, I think it could stick.
 

Manmademan

Member
Aug 6, 2018
5,208
I was just counter-arguing your idea that Sony should divert resources to such things. They needn't to. They can license out. Of course they should try more as every companies should. Business diversification is a good thing.
I think he's saying as I did that Sony's existing IP isn't well suited for the kind of kid friendly merchandising (playing cards, plushies, toys, etc) that Pokemon is known for. Sony would need to spend money copying and developing such an IP- this money would be far better spent elsewhere within their ecosystem that has a better return and is a better fit for the kind of people spending money on Playstation, not merchandise.
 

MultiMoo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,652
Silicon Valley
Any revenue from merchandising Playstation IP like Sackboys, Sly Coopers, or Ratchet and Clanks would have been a rounding error barely worth the effort in comparison to what the Playstation business brings in without them.
I wasn't arguing that it does big revenue. The OP is the one who things its a big problem for Sony, or whatever.

My point was simply that the merch they do make, seems to sell out for long enough that they keep bringing out different merch until (if) they bring back stuff.

For example, the Leviathan axe from God of War is coming at the end of September, largely for people to buy for Halloween and such. Party City lets you pre-order it.

The Thunderjaw statue that I bought for $130, however, is going for $500 - $2000 on Ebay because it is no longer for sale (after being available for maybe a year?)
 

Ascenion

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,807
Charlotte NC
I've never walked into a Target and saw some "in your face" Halo toy isles. But maybe that's just me.
It’s usually with the lego and nerf stuff. I think Halo is megablocks. And at least in NC there’s a shit ton of Fortnite stuff too.
It depends on what Marvel would have done if they hadn't sold them back. It's doubtful they would have survived the kind of acrimonious relationship Marvel had with Fox, and it's hard to see the Sony/MCU partnership happening. More revenue is always bettter than less and from that perspective it was a mistake, but trying to project the marvel/sony relationship had they NOT done that is a harder call.





$856 Million WW at the box office.
I mean they weren’t in a position to negotiate, my understanding was they needed cash and Disney had it. This was back when they were selling buildings and the like to stay afloat. And I think Marvel’s Toy Biz division still existed. Even now, Disney has the power to hurt Sony pictures if they don’t play ball. Quite frankly I’m surprised they didn’t just tank Spidey and force Sony to give the IP up.

Venom did well, but I mean flagship Spider-Man. The reboot shit won’t work anymore and FFH doesn’t crack a billion without being the follow up to Endgame.
 

Bundy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,574
It’s usually with the lego and nerf stuff. I think Halo is megablocks. And at least in NC there’s a shit ton of Fortnite stuff too.
Yep, I see a lot of (and I mean A LOT) Minecraft and Fortnite stuff here. But that all.
I was just counter-arguing your idea that Sony should divert resources to such things. They needn't to. They can license out. Of course they should try more as every companies should. Business diversification is a good thing.
Yeah, I know. And they already do that. They license out. As can be seen with all the merch in the Gear Shop, stuff on Amazon, etc.
But first they need some new Pokemon-like IPs so they can go after the "trading cards" money. And that's what I meant. They shouldn't. And I hope they won't.
 

Manmademan

Member
Aug 6, 2018
5,208
It’s usually with the lego and nerf stuff. I think Halo is megablocks. And at least in NC there’s a shit ton of Fortnite stuff too.


I mean they weren’t in a position to negotiate, my understanding was they needed cash and Disney had it.
They did, but Sony wasn't in danger of going bankrupt by any means. Corporate finance is a complex topic. The sale was an easy deal for both parties who had a pretty good relationship.

Disney has the power to hurt Sony pictures if they don’t play ball. Quite frankly I’m surprised they didn’t just tank Spidey and force Sony to give the IP up.
1.) Disney does not. Spiderman is one of Marvel's Flagship IPs, and it's best for them if they do well. Sony doesn't make any money from merchandising, so they don't have the leverage they did with Fox to cut off revenue dollars. It's already gone.

2.) "Tanking" the spiderman IP would involve what? Intentionally damaging the brand so no one wants to see the films? why would anyone sane do this? They'd hurt themselves from damaged merchandise and comic sales more than they'd hurt Sony, and rebuilding a damaged IP takes a LOT of work.

Venom did well, but I mean flagship Spider-Man. The reboot shit won’t work anymore and FFH doesn’t crack a billion without being the follow up to Endgame.
Venom is clearly and visibly part of the Spiderman IP. Most people know this- even without Spidey 3 introducing him previously he's been Spidey's most high profile villain since the 1990s. It's the fourth highest grossing spidey related film- only Spidey 3, FFH, and Homecoming outgross it, and FFH and Homecoming had the benefit of being tied to the MCU.

More importantly, Venom was a TERRIBLE movie that caught hell from US critics. It still grossed nearly $900m and was a PHENOMENAL success. Had it been made by anyone competent it would have crossed a billion easily. Venom 2 probably will, and Sony has been angling for a Spiderman/Venom film which will cross that line whether or not it's an MCU product.

Even the ASM films were fairly high grossing affairs- 709 and 757 million dollars each- and with the least popular Spidey Actor by a mile. People HATED Garfield and thought he was badly cast for those from the jump. Sony would likely be happily still making those had their production budgets not spiraled out of control. It is perfectly possible to make a profitable Spidey film that's not tied to the MCU, but Sony benefits from the expertise of Feige and Co. not only consistently turning out a quality product, but doing so on what are fairly tight budgets.

The ASM2 budget was projected to be as high as $300M! Far From Home was half that at $160M and is the better film in every way.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,084
I would prefer if they invested in movies instead. I need more action/fantasy settings in movies. Give me God of War on big screen.
 
Oct 31, 2017
439
I never said they do, only that merchandise obviously sells because there are loads you can't even buy anymore unless you go to Ebay.

However, they DID have stuff like LBP that could have made a buttload more, had it been capitalized on. There are also more chances in the future to have a game where merch is a big part of the income, though as many have said Sony doesn't really care since the games are what they sell to promote PlayStation.

You can find all sorts of cool merch in US and especially UK, and then it's even crazier in Japan where they have stuff most people have no idea exist.

One of my favorite shops is actually Insert Coin. Got a reversible PlayStation jacket from there, as well as a symbol patterned black shirt.





I have a God of War and Kojima Productions long-sleeve shirts from them as well.

They also have some really nice ones for other PlayStation IP, like this:

I need more wipeout corp clothing in my life. that feisar sweater is awesome.

I'm insanely happy only having to buy good games and enjoying them on their own merits. One of the things that annoys me the most about Microsoft is that everything is a "brand" for them. I cannot understand the whole story of anything they make without knowing comics, novels, mini-series. I don't buy games to have to read a second rate throw-away paperback in order to understand how games connect to each other.
 

Ænima

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,945
In a videogame store near me they sell merch besides games, and thers no lack of God of War merch there. They even offered me a GOW keychain for preordering the game.

The thing is most merch is sold to kids from popular games that expand they franshises to tv series, cartoons, movies, etc. Most Sony IPs are focused on a more mature audience which dosent give a crap about game merch.

Also Sony use they playstation brand more than a especific mascot. Thers lots of playstation merch out there, even recently they made a deal with nike for Playstation shoes.

 
Last edited:

Cactuar

Member
Nov 30, 2018
1,930
I mean they weren’t in a position to negotiate, my understanding was they needed cash and Disney had it. This was back when they were selling buildings and the like to stay afloat. And I think Marvel’s Toy Biz division still existed. Even now, Disney has the power to hurt Sony pictures if they don’t play ball. Quite frankly I’m surprised they didn’t just tank Spidey and force Sony to give the IP up.

Venom did well, but I mean flagship Spider-Man. The reboot shit won’t work anymore and FFH doesn’t crack a billion without being the follow up to Endgame.
You sound silly. You know nothing of what you're talking about. Sony was making billions on Spider-Man before the MCU was even a thing.
 
May 21, 2019
217
I mean it's not like don't doesn't merchandise the crap outta these products anyways.
I see so much tlou merch and god of war merch tho it's been dwindling due to the lull between the new releases.
 

Barrel Cannon

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
4,987
Sony doesn't have any IPs that they've developed enough to become a great merchandising tool, this is true OP.

However I don't necessarily see it as a problem. It's not the angle they've approached their business. I'm sure they could potentially go into it if they tried with some of their IP's(Sly/Jak and Daxter/Ratchet). I don't see it changing either tbh with the PS5. Sony's definitely experimented with the idea before with that that big push of that eyetoy video game for PS3. It failed miserably for them.
 

Thatguy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,043
Seattle WA
An IP's size isn't solely defined by its merchandise. Many companies would prefer a million more copies of a game being sold than a million toys being sold. Nintendo would rather sell another million copies of Mario Odyssey than sell a million Mario Amiibo.

In other words, Sony is doing fantastic with their IP, far better then Nintendo. They just don't get in the toy side as much. Also, they did do a Ratchet and Clank movie.
 

Manmademan

Member
Aug 6, 2018
5,208
Sony's definitely experimented with the idea before with that that big push of that eyetoy video game for PS3. It failed miserably for them.
???

The eyetoy was just a camera for the PS2. They sold around 10 million of those and had several dozen games either made for it or that contained enhancements. That wasn't a failure by any means, even if you don't consider the PS Move and PSVR both use similar cameras.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,084
An IP's size isn't solely defined by its merchandise. Many companies would prefer a million more copies of a game being sold than a million toys being sold. Nintendo would rather sell another million copies of Mario Odyssey than sell a million Mario Amiibo.

In other words, Sony is doing fantastic with their IP, far better then Nintendo. They just don't get in the toy side as much. Also, they did do a Ratchet and Clank movie.
Lol no, Nintendo has the most valuable IPs of all game publishers.
 

EvilBoris

Member
Oct 29, 2017
6,206
I see quite a lot of Playstation branded Merch, but as others have said , it’s more brand focussed than character focussed and fairly tasteful IMO.
They have dabbled in the past (The Ratchet and Clank Movie and the remake) and there was a lot of Sackboy merch.
 

Sleuth

Member
Jul 18, 2019
155
Why is making games that sell the level of merch of Minecraft or Mario a metric for success in gaming? Just make great games that are succesful. Anything else is just extra. Not the goal. As a gamer who cares how many toys and merch is sold based off their games? Its just silly to expect them to reach the level of Nintendo's merch. Also, unimportant, imo.

Sony makes very different games to Minecraft and Mario. Their aims are different.
 

Manmademan

Member
Aug 6, 2018
5,208
90% of that revenue comes from 3rd party games.
If that were true then Microsoft which has 99% of the same third party games would be close to them. They aren't.

Sony's first party titles are not only sales juggernauts (Uncharted 4, TLOU R, Spiderman, God of War, and Horizon are all over 10 million copies- Days Gone will likely be close to that level and GT Sport is somewhere over 8 million- and TLOU2, and Death Stranding are still coming) they drive sales to the platform and PS+ subscriptions as discussed earlier.

The depth and breadth of Sony's first party titles and exclusives are the overwhelming reason why people are choosing the console. ("breadth" being the important qualifier here- Sony is hitting the broadest audience with it's IP). That's "value of the IP." No one in their right mind at Sony would trade their IP for Nintendo's first party. Nintendo does what it wants and clearly has a niche, but it's not on the level of where Sony has been since the later years of the PS3.
 
Last edited:

Giant Panda

Member
Oct 25, 2017
648
If that were true then Microsoft which has 99% of the same third party games would be close to them. They aren't.

Sony's first party titles are not only sales juggernauts (Uncharted 4, TLOU R, Spiderman, God of War, and Horizon are all over 10 million copies- Days Gone will likely be close to that level and GT Sport is somewhere over 8 million- and TLOU2, and Death Stranding are still coming) they drive sales to the platform and PS+ subscriptions as discussed earlier.

The depth and breadth of Sony's first party titles and exclusives are the overwhelming reason why people are choosing the console. That's "value of the IP." No one in their right mind at Sony would trade their IP for Nintendo's first party. Nintendo does what it wants and clearly has a niche, but it's not on the level of where Sony has been since the later years of the PS3.
What? Nintendo's first party portfolio has got to be much more valuable than Sony's.
 

Manmademan

Member
Aug 6, 2018
5,208
What? Nintendo's first party portfolio has got to be much more valuable than Sony's.
It's not. Sony hits a broader audience with it's first party than nintendo does- the same people buying Knack are distinct from the people buying GT Sport who are distinct from the people buying Spiderman who are distinct from the people buying Uncharted, who are distinct from the people buying MLB: The Show, who are distinct from the people buying Bloodborne. This is how Sony seems to have no problem hitting 100m+ consoles every generation. Greater breadth of the IP. In the PS1 and PS2 era having a lock on third parties guaranteed that breadth, but with the PS3 and PS4 their first party is the differentiator over Microsoft.

Nintendo's sales juggernauts in contrast all rely extremely heavily on their mascots and target a similar audience.

This has been true for a long time. Sony also hits an older audience more likely to pay for things like PS+ subscriptions, which is where a very, very big chunk of the revenue is coming from. Because of that those IP are more valuable.
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2017
1,084
It's not. Sony hits a broader audience with it's first party than nintendo does- the same people buying Knack are distinct from the people buying GT Sport who are distinct from the people buying Spiderman who are distinct from the people buying Uncharted, who are distinct from the people buying MLB: The Show, who are distinct from the people buying Bloodborne. This is how Sony seems to have no problem hitting 100m+ consoles every generation. Greater breadth of the IP. In the PS1 and PS2 era having a lock on third parties guaranteed that breadth, but with the PS3 and PS4 their first party is the differentiator over Microsoft.

Nintendo's sales juggernauts in contrast all rely extremely heavily on their mascots and target a similar audience.

This has been true for a long time. Sony also hits an older audience more likely to pay for things like PS+ subscriptions, which is where a very, very big chunk of the revenue is coming from. Because of that those IP are more valuable.
Dude you're wrong. Nintendo sells more games, at higher prices and has bigger output. PS sells 100 mil mainly on the stranght of their brand. Exclusives are like 20% of their success.
 

Seeya

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,316
It's interesting looking at this thread. I see a lot of people attacking the premise that this is one of Sony's "biggest problems", but while skimming thru I don't see many suggestions as to what other big problems Sony has. Maybe the phrasing is slightly off, but given the OP says english isn't their native language I think people are getting stuck on that.

Playstation is a remarkably strong brand. There are some areas where they may be lagging behind their competitors (notably crossplay on certain games), but outside of that & improving/expanding the PS Now service for streaming, they don't have many other "problems" to speak of.

I think there's something to be said for Playstation lacking characters that are bigger than gaming. I know for one I always thought of Playstation just as the system that gets Final Fantasy while growing up. The various "mascot" characters never really ended up turning into long running franchises, and the characters I once associated with playstation like Lara Croft & Crash, are now multiplat. Obviously Sony overcomes this every generation, but it would be scary to think how dominant Playstation could be if they had characters like Mario that transcend the medium. The amount of money they could make from licensing stuff would be insane, and could then be funneled back into game development.

Either way, Playstation is doing great as is, but it's not like they couldn't improve in some areas. I think this is clearly one of them, even if it's not something that everyone on an enthusiast forum will necessarily care about.
Everyone should read this post before getting angry at the OP.
 

Manmademan

Member
Aug 6, 2018
5,208
Dude you're wrong. Nintendo sells more games, at higher prices and has bigger output.
"Selling games" isn't the greatest indicator of an IP's value. The ability of the IP to push systems and ancillary revenue is. A game that sells 2 million copies to a completely new audience that didn't own your console is more valuable than a game that sells 5 million but doesn't expand the base. Sony consistently puts out extremely high quality titles that attract an extremely diverse audience, thus the value of that IP portfolio. You can get the same third parties on PC or Xbox- but the PS4 sells (and third parties on PS4 sell) because of Sony's exclusives.

The switch will sell well, but can't realistically hit the 120M+ that the PS4 will. The games aren't there.

To put things a different way, Sony's IP being more diverse than Nintendo's attracts a more diverse audience and demonstrates that a certain type of game can be successful on their platform. This in turn enourages third parties to put their games there. Nintendo's IP does not do this- their audience habitually ignores anything that's not made by Nintendo themselves, which is a large part of the reason why third party sales have been completely anemic on every nintendo platform since the SNES.

double edit: to clarify what I mean about "selling games" not being the greatest indicator of an IP's value- the Wii and PS4 have sold "About" the same amount of consoles right now (though the PS4 will continue to sell).

Looking at sales on the Wii, you would think the thing was an incredible sales juggernaut that would never be passed:

1.) Wii Sports- 82 million
2.) Mario Kart Wii- 37 million
3.) Wii Sports resort- 33 million
4.) New Super Mario Bros Wii- 30 million
5.) Wii Play- 28.02 million
6.) Wii Fit- 22 million
7.) Wii Fit Plus- 21 million
8.) Super Smash Brothers Brawl- 13 million
9.) Super Mario Galaxy- 12 million
10.) Wii Party- 9 million

In contrast the highest selling PS4 title is "only" at 19 million, with uncharted 4 at around 15 million at #2. Yet the PS4 will easily outsell the Wii in less time, and is drastically more profitable- so much more profitable that it's not even in the same discussion. The PS4 is likely the most profitable system in history, despite Sony's first party not selling a fraction of a fraction of the games nintendo did on the Wii.

The reason is that the Wii titles were repeatedly selling copies to the same audience. There was no diversity there. Nintendo never expanded that base beyond people who were interested in playing their mascot titles and Wii Sports. The Wii was tracking to outsell the PS2 in unit sales, but when that casual audience lost interest in games like Wii Sports, sales for the system crashed through the floor as they all left en masse.

There also were virtually no third parties successfully selling games on that platform to the extent they were on the PS360, and no titles that generated recurring monthly online subscription revenue similar to PSN or Xbox Live. The "Wii X" IP didn't/couldn't attract either one. By the end of the generation that IP portfolio was nearly worthless. A new Wii Sports or Wii Fit wouldn't attract the interest of anyone right now.

So despite selling less "copies" overall, the PS4 portfolio of first party titles is FAR more valuable than Nintendo's stable of first party titles at the height of their most popular system. It targets and is bought by a more profitable audience, and a more diverse audience.
 
Last edited:

Voke

Member
Oct 28, 2017
616
I don’t think Sony needs a Master Chief / Mario type character at all. If anything it’s too late PlayStation is too mature of a brand to suddenly have a character mascot type of IP. Closest thing you’ll get is Crash or Spyro, which are multiplats now.