True, they do have enough money to settle anything but they still get into trouble which means loss of money for them, slower production of new systems and games for us so I dont think we gamers want that!
Not because they're evil, but because they've stopped funding good games, they probably feel like, ooo our third party support for the PS2 is so good, we don't need to waste any money on things like that....
Uhhh.... there was just as much 3rd party games on the PSX. To be honest I'd rather have lots of different companies encouraged to make games for a system than have one. We've already seen the effects of weighting the development of games on one company with the N64. I'd rather not repeat that traversty thank you very much. MS do the same; they have one or two in house developers (like Bungie) and rely on third party support
As I say, I think third party support is a far better idea than putting the onus on your in house programmers.
ICO 2? Did Sony produce a sequel to that wonderful game???
P.S.: If I recall correctly, this case is even older. I think that I read something about that half a year ago. As far as I know they sued Sony, because Metal Gear Solid uses the rumbling feature to distract the player while aiming with the sniper rifle... Kinda silly - the dual shock controller is now seven years old (release date: 2nd April 1998) - why didn't they sue Sony earlier?[size=-1] [/size]
Indeed. That's the list of games SCEA and SCEJ have developed not published. The published list is massive. Go have a look at GameFAQs. Get your record straight before you make sweeping generalisations.
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.