Jack Trenton, President and CEO of SCEA, have made his first post in the official SCEA blog.
"I hope you're enjoying our official SCEA blog. Personally speaking, it's great to finally have a place where we can talk candidly about the things we (and you) care about. While it's no substitute for a one-on-one conversation, I'm excited to have a chance to listen and talk with you here. With that said, everything communicated in any form these days has to be considered an "on-the-record statement" so as much as I'd like to, I can't completely throw my corporate hat out the window.
Backward compatibility works for many games on newer consoles, but titles such as The Simpsons: Hit and Run have been left out.
From base building to swinging willies, here are the best survival games around, which include a couple of less than obvious picks.
It turns out that many moons ago, Microsoft once had its eye on the Sony published LittleBigPlanet series.
Project Spark idea was decent but they quickly gave up ..
LBP was wonderful
Microsoft in a nutshell. Always tried to poach Sony employees, games, 3rd party games and devices like the depth camera that was turned into Kinect but was running on PS2 before Xbox 360. Wouldn't be surprised they wanted LBP. Just like they worked behind the scenes pushing the MLB to bring Sony's baseball game to Xbox instead of making their own.
https://www.playstationlife...
They didn't spend years trying to develop their own baseball game. They wanted Sony's game.
They're scum.
Microsoft didn't force MLB on Xbox. MLB gave Sony 2 options either go multiplat or risk losing the license.
Totally ridiculous comment.
The only exclusivity Sony had was to their own creation of The Show. Microsoft could have paid the MLB for the license just like Sony did and made their own baseball game.
Microsoft instead, groomed MLB for years in trying to poach Sony's game and bring it to Xbox. They're worth 3 TRILLION dollars. You think that's not enough money to make their own baseball game? Don't be delusional.
Microsoft spun it like they always do and told the media that they had to trust Sony with their hardware. After they put Sony in that position of not having a choice. Either go multiplatform or stop making one of their successful games. That's a no win scenario.
And what did Microsoft do? They didn't try to sell the game to the Xbox community. They put it on game pass to hurt Sony. Pushing the idea of why buy games that are $70 when you can play them in their cheap service for $10. It was a dirty tactic.
You fell for the Kool aid drink Microsoft served you instead of spitting it out. Hope it tasted good because you were fooled by Phil and the gang.
Xbox executive Sara Bond has told Axios that Microsoft spent a number of years trying to get MLB The Show onto Xbox consoles. And when it finally succeeded in breaking off PlayStation’s long-held exclusivity, the company had to “trust” Sony with pre-release Xbox Series X/S consoles.
Bond revealed that MLB The Show “always came up” in conversations between Microsoft and the Major League Baseball organization. “We always said, ‘We love this game. It would be a huge opportunity to bring it to Xbox.'” she recalled. However, when Microsoft’s efforts materialized, it put the company in an awkward situation where it had to send in pre-release consoles to a rival company.
"Microsoft instead, groomed MLB for years in trying to poach Sony's game and bring it to Xbox."
Take a nap, conspiracies are rotting your brain.
Xbox executive Sara Bond has told Axios that Microsoft spent a number of years trying to get MLB The Show onto Xbox consoles. And when it finally succeeded in breaking off PlayStation’s long-held exclusivity, the company had to “trust” Sony with pre-release Xbox Series X/S consoles.
Lying to yourself is unbecoming.
Article link tells you all you need to know in Sarah Bond's own words.
They were too cheap/inept/lazy to develop their own mlb game, so they port begged for years and bribed the mlb to make the show multiplatform. Like i said many times, xbox brought nothing to the table their 24 years, ZERO.
At least you and others get it. Note drank the Kool aid and asked for seconds thinking it was refreshing.
Most don't even know how it all played out but it's there in black and white for all to see. Microsoft brought it up for years until the MLB forced Sony's hand. It was a win win for Microsoft. Kill one reason to buy a PlayStation or kill the game by dropping it in a cheap service to kill Sony's sales numbers on PlayStation.
"However, Healey said Media Molecule wouldn't have felt right doing that, adding it would have been "morally corrupt"."
Major kudos to Media Molecule for being an upright studio with principles.
They chose well, Sony gave them the backing to pursue their dreams with no restrictions even tho their games especially dreams have very niche appeal. Media molecule and Sony deserve respect for this in an age of risk averse publishing.
Great, more stories like this please. Show the last of the zombies holding the line what we've been saying for years: Microsoft is anti competition, anti industry and has no interest in making games at all.
But hey, at least there's an Xbox Games Showcase to look forward to, right?
Well considering SONY just killed the series, LBP would've been dead by now either way. Though MM probably wouldn't exist by now either, so I'm glad they stayed with SONY, hopefully they don't get shut down any time soon or ever honestly.
They shut down the servers, that's millions of user created levels gone. That and dead are pretty much the same, it's also been years since 3 and they cancelled HUB soooo.
They shutdown the servers because no one was playing, no one in the community cared about the user created levels so why keep them up? Wtf you guys would never succeed in running a business.
Yea dood no one was playing so they shut off the servers. Cause people with enough common sense can't just Google why they were actually shut of, right?
I usually hate this guy when he speaks to the media.(that crap with 1000 dollars to the person who finds a PS3 in stores)
However this time, I like what he had to say and it was very humbling. Small steps in the right direction Sony, small steps. I like that he mentions, he knows his systems need games, and they seem to intend on providing.
Except that the PSone wasn't the system that championed 3d graphics and CD's. The Sega Saturn and PC were doing it before
"We could have easily produced PlayStation 2.5 at a slightly increased price over the older model, and driven some nice profits and marginal innovation for a few years but that’s not how we got where we are today. You have to gamble and make major investments in the present that will pay dividends in the future."
---
"We’re working hard to put the best tools in the hands of the development community so they can take you places you never imagined possible. We have more than 15 games coming from our own internal studios alone this year for PS3. Our third party partners will weigh in with a host of great games giving us more than 100 titles by year end on that system alone."
---
"We are heading into one of the biggest shows of the year for the videogame industry. E3 is only a month away. Everyone here at SCEA is working very hard and is dedicated to pushing the development envelope to show you not only new stuff for games like Heavenly Sword, Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune and Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction, but also a few surprises we have up our sleeves that no one has seen."
"In 1995, when we launched the PlayStation, the majority of the gamers were twelve to seventeen year old boys. 2D platform, fighting, racing, and sports games were the norm. Platforms were born and died within five years maximum. There was minimal difference between hardware platforms. We here at Sony championed 3D graphics, CD based technology and a more mature diverse library of games. We believed that our platform had a lifecycle that should survive well beyond the traditional five years. Some of the initial criticism we received was that the hardware was a bit pricey, the system was hard to develop for and the early software line-up needed some work. When we introduced PlayStation 2 in 2000 we received much of the same criticism. When we introduced DVD based storage we were told that CD had more than enough capacity to store game data. In a few short years DVD had all but replaced CD and that storage capacity was being squeezed by the development community. In 2006 the song remained much the same. Most of you know what transpired: 100 million PlayStations and thousands of great games later, the PlayStation had a ten year run and could still be selling today. PlayStation 2 left our original success in the dust and shows no signs of stopping anytime soon.
We fully realize that past success is no guarantee of future success, but it does give you some perspective. We have to bring the games to market that will showcase what the PS3 can do and ultimately entertain you like no other games have. We need to provide proof of what the PS3 can do for you and work tirelessly to improve the value and justify your investment. At the end of the day, it’s always been about the games. To push the boundaries of gaming beyond where they currently lie takes a great deal of risk. I think all the hardware manufacturers are doing that in some way. We could have easily produced PlayStation 2.5 at a slightly increased price over the older model, and driven some nice profits and marginal innovation for a few years but that’s not how we got where we are today. You have to gamble and make major investments in the present that will pay dividends in the future".
This is why I trust the ps3, regardless of what its doing currently.
Nice find Virtual Gamer.
I would like to see if this new stuff is big enough to pull them out of 3rd.