Why haven't MS & Nintendo invest in new IPs as much as Sony?

That's the thing I don't understand about those two companies. MS seems to be interested in just "buying out" exclusivity for certain franchises and Nintendo has stuck mostly to its core franchises. With last gen, Sony created Uncharted, Infamous, LittleBigPlanet, Last of Us, Heavy Rain, Puppeteer, Journey, etc. While we don't know how upcoming new franchises like The Order: 1886 and Driveclub will end up, at least they're trying. With Xbox I think Gears was the last new franchise wasn't it? Can't remember for Nintendo. And this is why Sony takes my money.

New ips come with risk. So they stick with what works. Make them change with your wallet. Support Sony's new IPS and if they see Sony do well they will follow. Its already starting to happen with Microsoft actually. Ryse, titanfall, and quantum whatever are all ips they have thrown money at.

I expect Nintendo to try more spin-off games, hopefully also try something new aswell. But you are right

Nintendo invested in the most new IP's last generation out of the big three. People just didn't care about most of them because they weren't Mario/Zelda/Pokemon.

And I don't think MS invests much in brand new IP's because they know that a new coat of paint doesn't change fundamentally the same mechanics.

@SolidGame_basic: Remedy had Alan Wake and Quantum Break, for the new IP front. Crackdown as well. Plus all the Kinect games.

this, also last gen they had different target market, ninty went for the motion controls casual gamers, m$ went for the bro gamers (online fps) then followed ninty with motion controls, sony stuck to their roots (which they better of) tried the motion control but failed just like the eyetoy on ps2

I'd love to see a new Crackdown game that was a lot of fun. But I doubt it.

New IP's are risky, Sony did a lot of them Last Gen and some worked (Uncharted, TLOU, Warhawk, Journey etc) And some didn't (Starhawk, Playstation All Star Battle Royale)

But there should be more new IP's I agree, Nintendo relies on Mario, Zelda, SSB and it works because it's known franchises just as MS relies on Halo and Gears. Either way this gen I hope we get to see a lot more new IP's as, it's new and fresh for the industry and gives us something new to play or bring us in story wise, of course most companies will stick to the original formula as it makes them money , but can only for hope for more new ip's.

Nintendo invests in a lot of new IPs. Most people just don't care about them.

sony had to do it out of necessity since they lost a lot of their third party exclusives to microsoft.

nintendo brings ips to the handheld while mostly sticking to what works on the consoles. so play their handheld, they have games for it

MS have invested a good deal in new IPs.

their fans aren't tired of playing halo and mario yet.

xbots love the yearly iterations of halo gears forza

I guess you could argue that the majority won't sell well so a new IP is always a 'risk'. Most of the ones Sony made last gen I thought were brilliant mainly because of the variety but I doubt many were 'hits'. So new IP is probably seen to be a double edged sword.

Alan Wake

I think that's precisely what it is.

Sony's 1st party is vastly overrated both in quality and quantity. Long gone are the times when numerous British Sony studios churned out smorgasboard of games of the highest quality across plentiful genres.

Now, apart from Naughty Dog, there isn't that much which actually does set Sony apart from its peers.

And for the record, I think we have now witnessed an IP bubble which imploded and backfired at Sony with these plentiful reshuffles / layoffs, etc. It's obvious they produced more than they could sustain hoping that something would stick.

FYI Microsoft has also tried and gave more than a fair chance to new IPs last gen, but also they clearly saw it early how the market works and you while you be disappointed with them for their cautiousness and methodical / no-nonsense profit-oriented approach, you cannot blame them in the business sense.

And I think as far as this gen is concerned, they put a lot of effort in providing new, fresh and exciting content. And variety.

if sony didnt have all that 3rd party....no one would buy their systems for their new ips. and they would be forced to bring back old classics like crash, spyro, ratchet and clank...

I think it's extremely naive, childish and idealistic to compare 1st parties of Sony and Microsoft. You have to take into the consideration that PlayStation brand had existed almost 7 years befoe Xbox in an ecosystem with extremely stable conditions when PlayStation came out a clear-cut winner for 2 generations straight (PS1, PS2). Plus the 1st party companies bought / formed back in the mid-90s costed PEANUTS (Psygnosis, Naughty Dog, etc.) compared to what, for example, Microsoft had to pay for RARE!

People only care about Sony's new IPs because that's all Sony has.

They can't survive on Old IPs like Nintendo can.

Microsoft survives on Marketing Multiplats as if they were Exclusive.

Sadly it's true. Nobody pays attention to them when they do actually release new original games. Look at Sony for example, they manage to get their new IPs a lot of attention and they are always talked about, while not so much when it comes to Nintendo's new IPs. I'm not sure if Nintendo isn't spreading out their new IPs as they should be doing or that people just don't care and forget them right away and only think of Mario, Zelda and Pokemon.

Sony did not "create" those games.. They bought the studios (or exclusive rights) to those games, just like M$ did.

The difference...

Do you remember Blinx the Time Sweeper? How about Voodoo Vince? No? Brute Force? Blood Wake? Chrome Hounds?

The bottom line is.. M$ tried to create franchises, but unfortunately most were terrible and or didn't sell well. Now they (wisely) pay good devs to create exclusive games while only owning a select few dev houses.

It's great that Nintendo and MS haven't invested in new IP's as much as Sony.

I'm more disappointed in how MS "buys" their console exclusives instead of "creates" them.

Look at Halo & Gears. That method bit them in the ass since the original studios moved on.

^

Read my post above.

Different philosophy for each company.

Sony wants to put top tier talent and big budgets into new IPs for a diverse lineup.

Nintendo polishes older franchises.

Microsoft doesn't see the difference between a first party game and a timed third party exclusive with timed DLC.

In Microsoft/Nintendo's defense, new IPs are very risky. Sony Santa Monica is one of Sonys best developers and they wasted 3 years of development on a time for a game that couldn't be salvaged, that's a HUGE waste of time/money/resources that could have been put into GOW4 and been a huge game for the PS4 this year.

Microsoft has invested heavily in 1st party new IP's this time round and buying out games like Titanfall (stopped it going on PS4). Win Win

Something Sony just cant do this time round. They need the indies to cover up the fact they cant invest like MS.

Like what?

If the games are fun, I don't mind.

*takes your gamer badge*

*throws it into a wood chipper*

Like Cows love the yearly iterations of Uncharted, Killzone, Infamous.

More likely the the new IPs are Japanese-centric that it would be difficult to localize them outside of Japan. This may explain why most new Nintendo IPs are ignored.

At least Tomodachi Collection (which has been Japan-only) is coming to the West.

Do you have a link to back this up?

I don't think it's true. And I'm 99% sure it wasn't true on consoles, though I'm sure you're including handhelds.

You must have missed the E3 then. Microsoft showed at least 6 new IPS include Quantum Break, Sunset Overdrive, Project Spark, D4, Below, Lococycle, Powerstar Golf and Ryse. They will be showing a bunch more at the E3. Nintendo has The Wonderful 101 & X, but I don't know what else.

*******************************************************************

Can't you name some of those new IPs Nintendo invested in. Do you at least have a link? I can easily list XB1's.

This is why Sony is loved by gamers worldwide. They provide world class experiences that don't try to suck money out of their fans.

Microsoft is the exact opposite of this.

Could X be considered a new IP from Nintendo considering its predecessor is Xenoblade?

That's the joke of the day, I'm sure. That's why gamers now have to pay a fee to play online games. lol!! Why they wanted to charge gamers $15 - $200 to buy a locked cars in GT6. Removing PS2 B/C & Linux support from the PS3. They've screwed fans many times before. Harcore fans just take it and ask for more.

Both Sony & Microsoft have screwed fans and have tried to suck money from them. That's what these big companies do.

A partial list of new Nintendo IPs since the Gamecube era:

• Pikmin
• Animal Crossing
• Golden Sun
• Advance Wars
• Eternal Darkness
• Geist
• Nintendogs
• Brain Age
• Wii
• Endless Ocean
• The Last Story
• Pandora's Tower
• Xenoblade
• Disaster: Day of Crisis
• X
• The Wonderful 101
• Fossil Fighters

How do you think Sony got theirs? They bought Naughty Dog (which is a American company), Polyphony, Sucker Punch, etc... to get Uncharted, TLOU, GT5, GT6, Imfamous SS. M$ bought Bungie, Lionhead Studio and Rare. No different then what Sony did to get new IP's and exclusives.

Most of those games aren't new IP's and some of them weren't even made by Nintendo. We're talking about THIS generation, not 2-3 generations back. lol!!

Pikmin, Animal Crossing, Golden Sun, Advance Wars, Enternal Darkness, Brain Age aren't NEW IP's. We're talking about for the Wii U.

@SolidGame_basic: That is one of the reasons why the wii u is such a terrible disaster in sales right now.

Most people who grew up playing nintendo back in their good days NES & SNES already moved on from childest crap like mario and zelda.

nintendo sucks at making new ips, and all of their franchises are already so boring.

Too far back going to the GC era. The statement under scrutiny was: "Nintendo invested in the most new IP's last generation". Last generation is crucial. Going back further only inflates the list.

In a fair comparison, it would require a look that far back for the other two (Xbox O.G./PS2) to qualify that initial statement. One might also argue that handhelds/console vs. console and console would also be unfair. It could be quite lengthy to do it proper.

Where did you come up with that regarding Polyphony? I don't even play racing games and I recall that Polyphony was originally a development group known as Polys Entertainment all within SCE (Sony Computer Entertainment).

I'm not talking about any studios save for Polyphony. Where or what gave you that impression that Sony bought Polyphony? You compared and listed Polyphony as a company Sony bought in the same regard to when bought Naughty Dog back in January 2001.

However, that isn't true with regards to Polyphony as they were originally a development group within SCE.

nice conspiracy theory bro

Which of those games aren't new IPs besides the ones you mentioned?

Okay, fair enough.

In that case you are still left with the following (this time slightly more extensive) list of new IPs since the DS/Wii era:

• Disaster Day of Crisis
• Brain Age
• Nintendogs
• Xenoblade Chronicles
• The Last Story
• Pandora's Tower
• Rhythm Heaven
• Endless Ocean
• Tomodachi
• Fossil Fighters
• The Legendary Starfy
• Pushmo
• Dillon's Western
• The Wonderful 101
• X
• Elite Beat Agents

I am curious, however... which IPs on that list weren't made by Nintendo?

No such thing is required, since I never once stated that I was making a comparison. I made a list of new Nintendo IPs in the last decade, which seemed to be a reasonable timeframe, to back up my earlier statement that Nintendo does invest in new IPs. Nowhere was a comparison intended or stated, therefore, there would be no necessity to list out the new IPs on the other platforms at all- people don't have trouble believing that Microsoft and Sony invest in new games, but they do have trouble believing that Nintendo does for some reason. That is the myth that I was dispelling.

Finally, no, there is absolutely no difference between a new IP on consoles and a new IP on handhelds, just as there is no difference in a new IP at retail and a new IP digitally- a game is a game regardless of the system it is on, and a new IP is similarly a new IP.