I would say the benefit would be people won't associate the PS brand with a specific type of gamer
like how Xbox is for "dudebros " and Nintendo is for "kids".
like how Xbox is for "dudebros " and Nintendo is for "kids".
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
PlayStation largely lacks brand defining, eternal mascot character/characters. And that is absolutely okay.
- Thread starter Hey Please
- Start date
They have
Kratos
Ellie
Aloy
Jak and daxter
Sly cooper
Ratchet and clank
Deacon St.John
Jin Sakai
Do I need to keep going ?
everytime I see these characters I immediately see PlayStation or think it
Kratos
Ellie
Aloy
Jak and daxter
Sly cooper
Ratchet and clank
Deacon St.John
Jin Sakai
Do I need to keep going ?
everytime I see these characters I immediately see PlayStation or think it
That's because you can't widely market and merchandise a violent character who has spent most of his gaming history as a murderous asshole.
But on an enthusiast forum people are naturally saying, uh Kratos.
Like I said Sonic and Mario are actual mascots because they are cartoonish characters that appeal to kids.
Kratos and Master Chief are just their given brand most iconic characters, by far. Master Chief is more merchandisable due to the military hero connection, as we all know military fetishism is a huge market.
That's a good point of view, and part of why Sony is "mass market".
It's weird, they've definitely tried to have mascots catch on, but none have caught on anything the likes of even Master Chief.
Astrobot could be it, but it's kinda stuck between a rock and a hard place where it needs the innovation of VR to arguably be a mascot for the tech (whereas without the tech it would be yet another platformer mascot), but the tech isn't near big enough to make it a household name
Astrobot could be it, but it's kinda stuck between a rock and a hard place where it needs the innovation of VR to arguably be a mascot for the tech (whereas without the tech it would be yet another platformer mascot), but the tech isn't near big enough to make it a household name
I have noticed this, and like you my takeaway was that this is a win for Sony/Playstation. The term mascot has developed in the context of Playstation to be such a everlasting cast of different heroes, from cartoonish platformers like Crash Bandicoot to mature and thought-provoking tragedies like The Last of Us. It absolutely is representative of the nature of the games existing exclusive to the Playstation platform, and this is something I wish for Microsoft - even though I recognize that Master Chief will always mean Xbox.
I don't believe this philosophy will change either, as they continue to build a roster of brand new IP's and have been open to chasing innovation franchise to franchise. I enjoy that when on Era they ask "who is the face of Playstation" there is a number of different answers. Players that were affected differently, and that everyone had a different moment in which they went "now this is why I have a Playstation".
That being said I want to make it clear how much of a fan of Xbox's golden children of the last decade Halo and Gears of War.
I still love the way Halo/Gears makes players feel. Xbox or not, these are franchises that stand as a testament to the modern shooter landscape, and most importantly the nature of cooperative gaming. I still introduce people to Halo or Gears and it is this experience that they can't find anywhere else but PC or Xbox, but larger then that they are just particularly unique and powerful experiences. The platform you played was damn near was an afterthought once you have the game in your hands. My hope for the next generation is that Xbox finds more IP's that can fill that void for players, time and time again. I think the last 2 Gears titles have been strong, but the decline in the popularity of the Xbox and more importantly Xbox's ability to ship out long-lasting experiences exclusive to their console is part of the reason why unlike Playstation, their mascots have remained the same.
Xbox has acquired a number of IPs, but for the sake of my point I'll bring up the Ninja Theory acquisition: Xbox acquiring a IP such as Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice and having exclusivity to the sequel is precisely what they should continue to do. That game provided me with an experience that was one in a million, and no matter the platform because I know what the first game delivered with, I am 100% willing to jump on a PC or Xbox to continue to experience that. For me already, Hellblade is now my go to exclusive (after the golden boys of course!) that I think of when I imagine what are the current Mascots. If they continue going as they appear to, we may see a line-up reminiscent of Playstation sooner than later.
I don't believe this philosophy will change either, as they continue to build a roster of brand new IP's and have been open to chasing innovation franchise to franchise. I enjoy that when on Era they ask "who is the face of Playstation" there is a number of different answers. Players that were affected differently, and that everyone had a different moment in which they went "now this is why I have a Playstation".
That being said I want to make it clear how much of a fan of Xbox's golden children of the last decade Halo and Gears of War.
I still love the way Halo/Gears makes players feel. Xbox or not, these are franchises that stand as a testament to the modern shooter landscape, and most importantly the nature of cooperative gaming. I still introduce people to Halo or Gears and it is this experience that they can't find anywhere else but PC or Xbox, but larger then that they are just particularly unique and powerful experiences. The platform you played was damn near was an afterthought once you have the game in your hands. My hope for the next generation is that Xbox finds more IP's that can fill that void for players, time and time again. I think the last 2 Gears titles have been strong, but the decline in the popularity of the Xbox and more importantly Xbox's ability to ship out long-lasting experiences exclusive to their console is part of the reason why unlike Playstation, their mascots have remained the same.
Xbox has acquired a number of IPs, but for the sake of my point I'll bring up the Ninja Theory acquisition: Xbox acquiring a IP such as Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice and having exclusivity to the sequel is precisely what they should continue to do. That game provided me with an experience that was one in a million, and no matter the platform because I know what the first game delivered with, I am 100% willing to jump on a PC or Xbox to continue to experience that. For me already, Hellblade is now my go to exclusive (after the golden boys of course!) that I think of when I imagine what are the current Mascots. If they continue going as they appear to, we may see a line-up reminiscent of Playstation sooner than later.
OP
OP
Well said.
Yes, on an enthusiasts forum Kratos is known. Presumably so are many other protagonists within Sony's FP titles. I still feel like Master Chief is on a different level when it comes association with the brand (and boy do I have a bone to pick with that but that is for a different time) and yes, Militaristic fetishism plays a large role in it but part of definitely because MS built Xbox's identity around Halo (specifically MC). And so like another user who you responded said, the perception of the Xbox's as a brand and who it appeals to was skewed by the power MS had furnished MC's Halo.
I feel it's hard to have a mascot that embodies your brand when said brand is incredibly diverse.
Mario has an all-ages appeal that fits Nintendo nicely. Master Chief shows off mature themes and symbolizes multiplayer gaming, which is what Microsoft's gaming kicked off with and they've always had a lot of.
Mario has an all-ages appeal that fits Nintendo nicely. Master Chief shows off mature themes and symbolizes multiplayer gaming, which is what Microsoft's gaming kicked off with and they've always had a lot of.
I dunno. Halo is still kind of Microsoft's precious child. They even name Windows app prototypes after it.
OP
OP
I wholeheartedly agree with it all (esp. the bolden and underlined part). Thank you.
He definitely comes the closest but his previous renditions were rather toxic and the new one, while being the best one, may or may not be 'eternal' (you ought to be able to guess what I am on about if you have played the game). However, I do agree that asking any gaming enthusiast about Kratos will immediately result in instant recognition.
They are using him for everything new lol
PS4's Playroom
PSVR
Astro's Playroom to show Dualsense tech
PlayStation Japan has Taro and Kuro, and PlayStation Taiwan has Ai-chan.
Ai-chan even has a spotify list https://open.spotify.com/playlist/4LutiUyPw9woWZrxqaoPsf
Ai-chan even has a spotify list https://open.spotify.com/playlist/4LutiUyPw9woWZrxqaoPsf
But their only 'angry' protagonist is Kratos.
And Ellie, but she's not a man.
I agree with your thread premise, by the way.
Sony has this... something for everyone vibe that is backed up every generation by a diverse catalog of games.
Going into the PS5, the first game they show real gameplay for is *drumroll* a new Rachet & Clank. That immediately sets that same tone. A person who isn't into R&C isn't really disappointed, because they know there will always be something else coming, of a different flavor.
That is Sony's strength.
I've grown up with PlayStation so while I agree they don't have their mascot, they have plenty of mascot characters that I enjoy. Crash and Spyro (not owned of course), Jak & Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, Sly Cooper, Sackboy, and now Astrobot. Personally I would really like Sony to find a way to utilize these and some of their other less well known 1st party and 3rd party characters in a party/co-op game. I like Asobi and Sackboy, I'd like to see one of them become the mascot but I don't see it happening unless there's a game that is a smash success critically and commercially.
Joel is angry his daughter is dead
Nathan Drake hates Hispanic people
SackBoy has hitler's heart inside his voodoo chest
Angry team.
Their platformer mascots like Crash, Sly, and Jak/Daxter are a lot better than Nintendo's though. They just never got as well known because Sony keeps coming out with new IPs, while Nintendo has been using the same IPs for decades.
I think what Sony lacks is recognition from those who aren't gaming enthusiasts. Mario and Sonic are well known by everyone whether they play video games or not, but the likes of Kratos and Nathan Drake? Not so much.
What Sony has to do better is branching out into other media using their established IP. How there isn't an Uncharted movie yet boggles the mind.
Nintendo frequently develops and publishes new IPs as well, including in-house IPs such as Splatoon, ARMS, Ring Fit Adventure, etc.
Yeah the logo is the mascot. Playstation is for the better because of it imo, not need to drag a franchise around forever because its the face of the brand, just make a new one.
Sony lacks a brand defining mascot, but it's not a conscious decision.
IP management has always been left at studio's discretion in the past, and as far as we know - there was no vision at the leadership of WWS then (and maybe even now) to have a brand-defining character.
Sony the publisher was ready to shelf/put on hiatus God of War after Ascension.
IP management has always been left at studio's discretion in the past, and as far as we know - there was no vision at the leadership of WWS then (and maybe even now) to have a brand-defining character.
Sony the publisher was ready to shelf/put on hiatus God of War after Ascension.
I don't think Nintendo gives the same amount of attention to Arms or Ring Fit as Mario, Zelda, etc. All of Playstation's budget/attention goes to their newest IPs, which change pretty often with each gen.
I mean, I don't think I particularly agree. Both Ring Fit and Arms got plenty of attention at launch and continued to receive support afterwards. It really depends on the sales of the games. Splatoon has entered the upper echelon of Nintendo IP within 5 years, whereas more legacy IP don't receive as much attention currently.
Mario and Zelda are outliers in their importance within the company as a whole, but I feel that if Sony had franchises that existed from the beginning of their history and remained successful to this day, they would have no shame in continuing them as well. I mean, Ratchet & Clank and Kratos have been around for three generations now for example. They just aren't as iconic as some Nintendo IP.
I think your out of touch then. Chief is as symbolic as the colour green for Xbox.
Idk, I really don't think Ring Fit or Arms are getting as much as attention as BotW for example. There are definitely some legacy IP series which could have some more attention, but most of their biggest series right now besides Splatoon are decades old.
I don't think it's even really fair to compare Ratchet/Clank to Mario or Zelda because Ratchet has been around since the PS2, Mario/Zelda have been around since the NES. There's just been a lot more time for these series to sink in, and Nintendo also markets them as some of their biggest series while Ratchet doesn't really get the same amount of attention by Sony.
Don't they actually try to use their hideous, photorealistic characters from their gritty violent games as "mascottes" from time to time?
They rode Sackboy's popularity when it was hot, they tried to launch Ratchet and Clank as a movie/cartoon property, and i'm sure they would LOVE to be actually able to use Crash Bandicoot's ip and characters as their own.
I'm not sure i'm buying this "Sony doesn't care about cartoon mascottes and the family friendly market and that's absolutely a good thing don't you dare even think otherwise" narrative, i think they just didn't manage to score a major, everlasting success in that particular department for multiple reasons.
They rode Sackboy's popularity when it was hot, they tried to launch Ratchet and Clank as a movie/cartoon property, and i'm sure they would LOVE to be actually able to use Crash Bandicoot's ip and characters as their own.
I'm not sure i'm buying this "Sony doesn't care about cartoon mascottes and the family friendly market and that's absolutely a good thing don't you dare even think otherwise" narrative, i think they just didn't manage to score a major, everlasting success in that particular department for multiple reasons.
I mean I know plenty of "general public" gaming people who couldn't even come close to guessing its name.