God of War 2: Divine Retribution (PS2)

Well I guess that pretty much puts a nail in the coffin of the PS3 coming out any time before december 2006.

I don't believe Sony would invest so much in a AAA sequel and keep it on the PS2. If Sony isn't putting this big of a first party title in the cycle for the PS3, it speaks voulmes about the faith they have in the system coming out this year.

Will we see the PS3 in bulk before Summer of 2007? Inquiring fans want to know.

Those bastards, how dare they! "/Pulls off leather glove and bitch slaps Sony across their face with it./"

Didn't Sony already admit that the PS3 wouldn't be released until late fall at the earliest?

EDIT: Nevermind, I read the year in Overlords post wrong and can't seem to be adle to delete my messages anymore.

Because a story with no links is nobody's friend:

http://static.flickr.com/34/11097870...d83589.jpg?v=0

http://static.flickr.com/45/11097872...44e3fa.jpg?v=0

http://static.flickr.com/38/11097878...c66ae3.jpg?v=0

http://static.flickr.com/36/11097877...98fca3.jpg?v=0

http://static.flickr.com/42/11097874...f468ce.jpg?v=0

This'll more than likely be sitting my my mailbox after classes. I'll try and transcribe when I get the chance.

So happy. I hope they keep the number of cerberuses (cerberi?) to a minimum. I hate those things.

For the record, if delaying the PS3 means they get it down to a price that won't cost the average consumer their first born child, so be it.

I don't think it would be beyond Sony's capabilities to release a ramped-up version for the PS3 at the same time they release the PS2 version. This announcement doesn't really clarify Sony's PS3 plans in any way.

Aside from that, I'm pretty interested to see what they come up with for the sequel.

Well, since I saw last night that the original is now a "classic" and is $19.99, I'll have to go buy it and play it.

Why wouldn't they release this for the PS2? Even if the PS3 comes out tomorrow, the PS2 will have a bigger install base next year still.

Because Sony needs AAA games to entice the public to drop however-much-money on the PS3.

But I'm fine with GoW2 debuting on the PS2, since I probably won't be buying a PS3. It does seem like a stupid business decision, though, especially since it will be competing with third-generation 360 games by that point. And with the Jak, Ratchet and Sly franchises wearing down, and with Gran Turismo, Metal Gear and Final Fantasy all notoriously unreliable when it comes to releasing games on schedule, the PS3 launch window could be hurting for exclusive franchises.

Crow, please let us know if the article includes a side-bar or any kind of information on Jaffe's PSP game. He's so damn ambiguous when he talks about it. I must know more. thxkbye

the metal gear solid games have been released on time. there's a difference of taking time developing games and delaying release date after release date like nintendo has done numerous times with zelda.

i can't wait for the sequel to this game but i wouldn't be surprised if they end up scraping it for the ps2.

Seems like a perfectly fine business decision, this platform will guarantee more sales, it's as simple as that. People forget that Sony is still making buckets of money off the PS2, and PSOne, so they should keep milking it.

Exactly. Wether this is its final year or not, the PS2 is having a killer year in terms of potentially great games, so Sony really has no reason to not support it anymore. Which is exactly the attitude any manufacturer should have, people aren't gonna stop playing and wanting games for a system just because the new hotness is around the corner. And there will most likely be another GoW installment on PS3 anyway, seeing as Sony is apparently decided to treat it as its major franchise.

That's like saying that Nintendo shouldn't have bothered with creating Super Mario 64 to accompany the N64 launch. After all, Nintendo would have made more money churning out more games for the millions of established Super NES owners, right?

Not really a fair comparison. Compare where the SNES was when the N64 launched to where the PS2 is right now with the PS3 on the horizon. The PS2's still very much alive and well, and I can guarantee it'll stay that way well into 2006. Putting a big name game on a system that has a user base of 8 million STILL ACTIVE gamers as opposed to a system that's more than likely going to have serious problems reeling in early adopters is smart. Never minding the fact that PS3 owners will undoubtedly still be able to play the game..

This does offer more proof, however, that the next gen is still happening long before it's necessary.

Was it possible to implement Super Mario 64 on the SNES? Nope.

Um...that's EXACTLY why they need big-name franchises. If all the best games are still debuting on the older hardware, there's no incentive to drop $500+ on the leap to the next generation. ESPECIALLY if this thing doesn't bow until 2007, putting them in direct competition with third-generation 360 games. At that point, you can't launch with Dynasty Warriors 23 or Another Fucking Madden and expect the public to care. You need SOCOM, you need Gran Tursimo, you need God of War.

They definitely need Dynasty Warriors a lot more than Socom in Japan.

I would also like to think that good games would be a lot more important than merely big names for a lauch, but that's probably a bit too idealistic.

Let me get this straight, you rather they develop games exclusively for the new console while forgetting the HUGE installed base of the current (and very much alive PS2) even though the game itself doesn't require the new technology?

No. As I said above, I'm not planning on buying a PS3, but I'm also a fan of God of War. I'm selfishly excited that I'll get a chance to play the sequel, assuming my PS2 can survive another year without crapping out.

From a business perspective, a marketing perspective, a looking-toward-the-future perspective, it's a bad move. Imagine if, prior to the Xbox 360's launch, Microsoft had announced that Halo 3 would debut on the original Xbox instead. Do you really think you would have seen as many people lining up to buy 360s?

And if I WAS planning on buying a PS3, you bet your ass I would rather have Sony putting their best and brightest developers to work on the next generation instead of futzing around with badly outdated technology. Go watch the bonus features on the original God of War disc, the amazing levels that had to be cut because the aging PS2 hardware couldn't run them without hitching, and then try to tell me that sticking with the current hardware is a good idea.

This is a good move for God of War 2 game sales and a bad move for PS3 sales. Which is more important to Sony in the long run?

I think they figure Metal Gear solid and/or the next Gran Turismo are bigger drivers for people to get the PS3.

Which are both franchises that refuse to release their games "until they're done," which makes them unlikely launch titles.

Not to mention the fact that Turismo has lost a lot of its luster in the last few years, and the Metal Gear franchise is no longer exclusive to Playstation.

I think it's a nice thing for gamers, mind you. Too often companies just give up on their current systems just so they can concentrate on the new one coming out, leaving us with shit (unless we can afford and find the new system at launch). Is Nintendo even making Gamecube games, anymore?

From the business side, though, I just don't see it as a positive. You're just giving gamers less reasons to buy into the new generation. If they're still making great games for the system someone already has, why would they spend the $500 to upgrade?

It still gets released first for the playstation, and will probably continue to do so in the foreseable future.

God of War seems great and all, but I don't see lines of people associating that game with the PS3. It's a balance, yes, you want to give people an incentive to move to the new machine, but at the same time you want to keep making money. And from everything Sony seems to be showing, is that they still believe the PS2 is a platform that is worth investing in (and I would agree with that).

Exactly, and that's why the "PS2 is pure profit" argument doesn't wash. Yes, it is pure profit now but the PS3 will be pure loss when it launches, something that can only be mitigated by getting people to actually buy the console. Healthy sales of GOW2 will not fill the gigantic hole created by a soft PS3 launch.

Now, it's entirely possible (probable, even) that the PS3 will sell through on brand recognition alone. So I don't think this is suicide. And personally, I'm thrilled because I can play GOW2 without spending $500. But it doesn't make much sense, either.

This is ridiculous. It's like arguing with a child.

A few indisputable facts:

--By this time next year, the PS2 will be dying. It will have had a longer and more successful run than pretty much any console in history, but it will still be dying as gamers migrate to next generation consoles.

--If Sony wants to stay in the game, they will need quality exclusives for the PS3.

--They can't rely on multiplatform companies like Rockstar, Capcom or Konami to provide those exclusives, especially not with development costs skyrocketing.

David Jaffe is pretty much widely regarded as the most talented developer working for Sony right now. Putting him to work on an underpowered console that won't let him recognize his full artistic vision while hoping that other developers will step in to create killer aps for the PS3 is a BAD DECISION.

I don't know how to make that any clearer.

No more ridiculous than you whinning about something that benefits gamers, specially gamers who won't be buying a PS3 (as you said). This the kind of corporate think that just baffles the mind, you will argue against your own best interest! Sony should be proud of you!

I don't know what you mean by "dying", but we can say for your that by this time next year there will still be more PS2 consoles out there than PS3s and XBoxes 360's combined. More consoles, means, more opportunities to sell the games.

Not to mention, if you really like the game and have a PS3, it seems very likely you can play it on your brand new $500-600 machine.

Haven't argued against that. From my point of view exclusives are evil, but this one game doesn't mean they won't have any.

I'm sure they'll have plenty of these dumb exclusive titles, no sense in arguing about that when we don't even have a launch date ...

The PS2 won't let him achieve his FULL ARTISTIC vision! Incredible! It's holding him back! And here I thought at the core of every game was a fun premise, not the latest real time 3D rendering engine. Look I like good looking games as much as the next geek, but has he really expressed in public that he can't stand the PS2 because it's holding him back? Maybe he's found a way to implement those leves he couldn't do in the new version. Who knows, but to say that it's a waste to have a developer make a game for a hardware platform that is in so many homes, it's really absurd.

blah, blah, blah.

You really are fucking stupid.

I'm sorry you are an ass trying to talk about irrelevant stuff.

Good god...

So SCE decides to make a sequel to a highly overrated but incredibly profitable platformer. IT'S ARMAGEDDON FOR THE PS3! THE SKY IS FALLING! RUN YOUR ASS TO COSTCO AND BUY AS MUCH CANNED TUNA AND POWDERED MILK AS YOU CAN CARRY! Or, more realistically, realize that it signifies absolutely nothing. When Sony produced Final Fantasy IX for the Playstation <-- one, which released in Nov 2000, it didn't signify a lack of faith in the PS2. It's called milking the cash cow.

So after slogging through the heated arguments in this thread, I learned two things:
1) God of War 2 is coming early next year.
2) I'll be able to play it after paying $50, instead of $450+ like I thought would happen.

I'm happy. Did I miss anything?

There's one less reason to buy a PS3. Other than that, no.

"I'm not buying a PS3, but I sure as well will whine and bitch because this game is not a PS3 exclusive".

I think that sums it up.

Actually, that was Square's doing. They also released Chrono Cross and Vagrant Story about 3 months prior to the PS2 launch. The only reason Sony let 'em do it is because A: Square had been working on all 3 games for roughly 2 years and wanted to clear inventory before devoting all their attentions to Final Fantasy X.... B: Sony worked with Square in making Vagrant Story sort of the demo game for the texture smoother (pretty much every magazine at the time had the same comparison shot from that game....the difference in quality is more dramatic than with any other PS1 game), and C: Square was one of the scant few big name developers that had a game ready for the first gen (the exceedingly shitty The Bouncer), meaning there was no need to crack the whip as much as they did, say, Namco, whose entire list of first gen games were rushed.

That wasn't milking the cash cow so much as it was keeping a big gun developer happy...otherwise, they would've pimped Chrono Cross and Vagrant Story a lot more than they did.

I agree with you, it does seem kind of silly to be bringing out your biggest guns for an aging platform. However, from a gaming standpoint, I couldn't be happier. A system's last wave games are almost always better than first wave games for the next generation. I'd rather have a God of War made by designers who know the hardware then a God of War made by a team still struggling to learn and utilise a new system.

Could there be more to this story? Wouldn't it be something if GoW2 lauches on PS2 whenever and then 6 months later the 3rd is released exclusively on PS3? Think about the abrupt ending of Halo 2 and how many more X360 sales there would have been knowing that the conclusion of the story was just months away.

The only problem with this is that it requires simultaneous development on essentially 2 games on Sony's part. Still, this kind of stuff happens more and more with movies. Why not develop one larger story line, use the same preproduction team and then have it split at development?

Seriously, just stop. If you can't handle people discussing the business side of the industry without squealing and shrieking like a fanboy, maybe you should just stay out of this forum entirely.

I can handle the discussion fine, and *gasp* even people disagreeing with me. For some strange reason you got upset and started throwing insults around. You can't fathom that somebody thinks differently than you, and that a case can be made from both sides as to why release this particular games for X or Y platform.

I just provided a reason why they would release it for the largest installed base and you seem to be upset by that idea.

Grow up.

...

Jaffe is actually working on a PSP project right now and not God of War 2.

Right, but I remember an interview where he basically said he wouldn't allow anybody else to take the reins for GoW2, because he had a lot of ideas planned. So I'm guessing he'll develop the PSP game and the sequel simultaneously. If Sony did give the franchise to someone else, that's a massive slap in the face.

If they release GoW2 on the PS2 in 2007, then it will likely be early 2009 before we get a GoW3 for PS3. Now that sucks for gamers.

You're way off base Capitan. Slater, while occasionally lacking tact, is right on the money. You're coming across as a little fan-boyish.

I highly doubt that MGS4 will be a launch title (it's more likely to come out a few months after the console, but I bet it will be under a year after), but I don't see where you get the "released only when they're done part", since Kojima has never released a game later than he said would. Those games have always stuck to their original release plans, established well in advance.

And it's still a Playstation exclusive franchise, mostly.

I don't know what's so "fanboyish" about what I've said, I don't think God of War is something people would associate with a PS3 nor a deal breaker because it's not implemented exclusively on the PS3.

I just provided an alternate explination which I think makes a lot of business sense, and that is they can sell a lot more with this plan. If you can show some type of study saying people were holding their PS3 purchases for the release of PS3 GoW then I guess you can say my argument has no merit at all. If not, people can disagree with it, but save their temper tantrums.

Sure, Blunt. I think when MGS4 finally does appear, it will be a huge system-seller. But if that doesn't happen during the first few months of the sytem's release (and given what a perfectionist Kojima is, I don't see him rushing or releasing an unfinished product), it leaves the PS3 without a killer app.

That's the point of contention here. If none of the major franchises can make an appearance during the launch window, can the PS3 still take off? The Xbox 360 was able to survive without any killer apps at launch, but it had no next-gen competition. Sony won't have that luxury.

Especially since, if the PS3 does get pushed back to 2007, its launch games may be pitted directly against Halo 3 on the store shelves.