Next-Gen's Matt Matthews sorted through GameRankings data in order to gather his findings. What was undoubtedly a tiresome process becomes a fascinating read. Notice the incredible absence of prolific publishers, such as Ubisoft and Midway on this chart? Why? They're pretty far down the list.
Phil Harrison, who is moving from Sony Europe to Atari, will have quite a task at hand. Atari currently stands with a 55.5% average. We wonder if Harrison's Atari will be able to compete against the offerings of Sony and its various Computer Entertainment first-party divisions. We doubt it.
[Via Joystiq]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-04-2008 @ 6:23PM
Autobon said...
I have a hard time taking this list seriously. I mean, why is lucasarts up there? They hardly released anything in 2007, and they beat microsoft, ubisoft, etc?
Looks like someone needs to do his research better. Until next time.....
Reply
3-04-2008 @ 10:17PM
Jacksons said...
I wouldn't put too much thought into it. Anyone who buys their games based on the publisher would be making a horrible mistake, anyway. I do have favorite developers, but I couldn't care less about who publishes their stuff. (dammit, three of them happen to be Sony. Way to wreck my point Insomniac, Naughty Dog and Sucker Punch.)
3-04-2008 @ 11:14PM
PSN: KillaKornbread (the shirt is a lie!) said...
well keep in mind that some of these companies publish ALOT of those horrible movie and kids games too so that will hurt the average. Sony and Nintendo only did like 30 games each in 2007 as opposed to the 100+ of everyone else but ill take quality over quantity any day.
3-05-2008 @ 8:24AM
Ahrel said...
SCEA does indeed rock, they're right up there with Nintendo for me when considering which system to buy thanks to what they're actually publishing (first party wise more so than 2nd).
However, if you follow the links, using metacritic Sony isn't on top, this is just through gamerankings. But, still, this is confirmation from critics that Sony's games are some of the best.
Reply