Yeah, Sony doesn't waste $ on adds. Wish they did tho but w/e. Better on the game than on adds huh

A killer app has nothing to do with sales and everything to do with the quality of the game. It makes me really sad to see another person (you) this gen put sales above quality. I guess you must think Wii Fit is an amazing killer app. /Facepalm.

Great point butterfinger. For me a killer app is something that I would want to buy and game. That having done so I find myself immersed in time and again. It is the bunch of grapes the fox could not reach in that regardless of what is said about them by those that cannot obtain them we know the real truth about the flavor.

Sales don't justify quality.

The game will be great I have no doubt from what I've seen but they need to make a take me trailer a real stand out that leaves no doubt that I should pick this up because I am behind as it is playing MGS3, LBP and SF4 right now. Vice city stories on the PSP aswell LOL!!!!!!!!!!!
In other words I have not picked up KZ2 yet.

"Killer App", "Triple A" and any other variant of those terms simply means really good games. Sales don't really matter in my opinion. A good game is a good game regaurdless if it doesn't hit the mainstream or sell tons of units. Just look at Okami for example.

1. I never said Killzone isn't of quality.
2. I never said Sales = Quality.
3. I never said WiiFit is an awesome Killer app /facepalm again
4. I said a Killer app can be personal, so InFamous could be YOUR killer app, and it could be MINE too

Infamous may be a killer app, but only to those that rush out and buy a PS3 to get it; do you personally think people will go out in droves to get a PS3 due to infamous as they did with MGS4? Or with the fact that PS3 has Blu-ray? Or like some did with LBP even or will do with FFXIII, God of War, GTAIV and Gran Turismo? Notice I'm not even talking about quality here, I'm not defining quality with sales.

I doubt infamous will define PS3 like LBP has or Metal Gear Solid has. A killer app is an application that defines a platform. The games that will most likely adscribe to that definition are the games that will make you go out and buy the platform. Notice I'm not saying Killer App = quality either. Okami wasn't a killer app for PS2 but it was certainly a killer game. (Dark General beat me to it)

Wii Fit and Wii Sports are crap games, but they're killer apps for Wii owners, that's what made most Wii owners get the console. Not because of the quality, but because of the novelty or whatever makes them have fun with it. My PC killer app is net access, and that's not necessarily a game and the net isn't necessarily full of fun or quality, but it certainly meets some of my needs.

As you can see, Killer app is not synonymous with "Killer game" or "Killer fun" either. Infamous will be a killer game, just like Killzone, but it may not be a killer app. True, the "sales" bar may be subjective, but not as subjective as your own definition of killer app, which isn't about metascores or sales, it's about your personal definition of quality which is apparently how well crafted PS3 games are, and that's respectable and I agree to some point, but see Okami, Ico, SOTC, Rez, or several other games which have more "Killer app potential" than Halo which is just another generic FPS with cartoony colors, but since they lacked the mainstream appeal due to the fact that the games were too complex for people to get involved with, or the marketing for people to easily identify them, they ended up as killer titles (Shadow of the colossus, ICO, Okami and Odin Sphere are personal killer apps of mine for PS2, but as I said, they're too personal, not so mainstream as to consider them "the PS3 killer apps" or "the games that defined PS2", at least when you ask your typical PS2 owner; GTAIII, GT3:A-spec, FFX and Metal Gear Solid 2 defined PS2, most likely).

I'm getting too many disagrees from people I usually agree with, it's just that the terms "Killer app" and "AAA" are being thrown this generation way too much and people put way more weight in those terms than they should. If Infamous is your personal killer app, why should you care what I think about it anyway? I will be getting that game, and I will also get prototype BTW, but Infamous isn't the reason I got a PS3. Uncharted is to me my personal PS3 killer app, as is its backwards compatibility with PS2 (at least back then when it still was), because of how freaking good it is, its graphics, storyline, and gameplay, but as far as the mainstream go, it's not so much of a killer app as Gran Turismo 5 will be or Metal Gear Solid 4 was. I also bought my PS3 the second Virtua Fighter 5 came out because that was the launch window game I was waiting for the most (sadly 360 got it eventually and with online play).

Sony could turn some of their games into mainstream killer apps if Sony wanted to penetrate the mainstream but they're not fighting. Maybe I'm just venting because I'm dissappointed in the high expectations I had for Killzone 2.

Let's set things straight: A killer app isn't synonymous with high quality crafting. A killer game may unfortunately not be a killer app. A killer app may be a great game but not necessarily.

And as for me, I don't judge a game by its sales or metascores. I buy the games that appeal to me the most. And right now, I'm enjoying Kingdom Hearts: RE: Chain of memories even though it sold little and has a metascore of "just" 70. My most enjoyable experiences of the next-gen have been Bioshock, Resistance: Fall of Man and Uncharted. I don't like Halo or Gran Turismo and I only use Wii games for a bit of "excergaming", not for entertainment/fun, even when they're the biggest sellers. See?

Edit:

Morganfell, let me add that if you already have a PS3 but the game would make you get a PS3 if you didn't, it would be your personal killer app. Why? Because you liked what you saw and what you knew about its features and got it.

I got a PS3 because I saw Virtua Fighter 5, I had played previous Virtua Fighters and loved them, and back then it used to be exclusive. I played VF5 and confirmed it was as good if not better than the previous titles. I had the belief it was a killer app and confirmed it as soon as I played it.

Then came Uncharted. I really wanted that game but I wasn't sure if I would have gotten a PS3 for that game, yet I already had a Ps3 so I bought it. Now I can say with confidence that, had I known Uncharted was so good before buying it, I would have run out to buy a PS3, so it's a killer app.

Morganfell, I usually agree with you and I think you are one of the most articulate guys here on N4G, and I do not wish to contradict you, but let me quote two definitions of "Killer App" from urban dictionary and one from Wikipedia:

1. killer app:
stands for killer application. Used to describe a game/application that really makes a system/computer.
"Halo was the killer app for the Xbox "

((I didn't even like Halo when I played it first on a demo Kiosk so I got a gamecube instead the day it launched))

2. killer app 4 thumbs up
"An application that proves the usefulness of the underlying technologies"

A typical killer application:
- the first spreadsheet application

Killer apps in the internet domain:
- Wikipedia
- LiveJournal
- MySpace
- Flickr
- YouTube

According to Wikipedia: "A killer application (commonly shortened to killer app), in the jargon of computer programmers and video gamers, has been used to refer to any computer program that is so necessary or desirable that it proves the core value of some larger technology, such as computer hardware like a gaming console, operating system or other software. A killer app can substantially increase sales of the platform that it runs on."

I'll let you question the validity of Urban Dictionary and Wikipedia.

Cookie, you said "Infamous may be a killer app, but only to those that rush out and buy a PS3 to get it; do you personally think people will go out in droves to get a PS3 due to infamous as they did with MGS4?"

I have to disagree. Infamous looks like a killer app to me and I already own 2 PS3s. I am not rushing out to buy a PS3 as I already own one. Yet for, it is still a killer app.

A killer app isn't a title that defines a platform, rather it is a title that defines gaming in experience regardless of genre or platform.

App = short for application. game = application. So by the transitive property, Killer game = Killer app.

Sorry, but it doesn't seem like your definition of killer app jives with anyone else's. Arguing about it doesn't do any good when the perception of "Killer App" differs from person to person.

The word "Killer" in "Killer games" is used to describe how great or well crafted it is according to most people here. Call them "Great games" if you will. Not all "Great Games" are "Killer apps" according to the definitions of killer app, capisce?

The word "Killer" in "Killer app", according to the definitions, relate to its usefulness or desireableness. Some great games, whether because they got great reviews or because they were truly unique (see Okami or ICO) weren't mainstream killer apps in terms of being consistent with the definition's I just mentioned.

Same word can have different meanings in different contexts. Not that hard to understand.

Let me add that any application, be it hardware or software or a service or whatever you like, may be the greatest thing since slice bread. But if it never gets out of the tech demo phase, or if it never makes it out of the beta or the design phase, how can it be called a killer app?

Or now to an example that relates more to the current situation of firat party PS3 games. What is the point of them being so great in terms of features compared to the competition if they get no freaking advertising? Or if they have no identity to appeal to a very wide audience?

I actually loved Mirror's Edge. To me it's a Killer (GREAT) game, but not a Killer app. Hardly anyone cared about it. It's pretty innovative and yet it fell flat on its face. Even when it had the EA marketing machine behind it, it didn't make a bleep on the radar. Hardly a Killer App. Same word, different context, different meaning.

http://m-carstairs.com/engl...

You have effectively undone you own argument with the term killer game. As was mentioned, the definition varies from person to person and the more rigorously you endeavor to have others accept your definition the further you move away from being able to prove your case.

A killer app is individually defined. Even as you say people rush out to buy a particular console for that title. Because of mass hypnosis? No, because it appeals to them individually. At the end of the day when all is said and done what makes a game a killer app is personal. One can no more determine that for an individual than can a movie critic determine if a particular film will appeal to you or reach you on a certain level.

You are confusing a killer app with a console seller and the two are not one and the same.

The fact is for legions of PS3 fans such as myself, current owners, inFamous is shaping up to be a Killer App.

from what i know is a game that makes people want to buy the system or system seller.

AAA on the other hand is a must buy title. In this case i say Infamous will be indeed on of those games that will be a must buy title like KZ2,Uncharted,MGS4 etc. It's also a garuntee that some people will buy a PS3 for Infamous.

I haven't undone my argument, pal. As I clearly explained, I'm using the same word in different contexts with (as explained) different meanings. But to clear all the confusion, if you simply exchange "Killer game" with "Very well crafted game" (the grapes we, the "gaming elite" (or whatever) love to taste that the fox won't reach) and "Killer app" with "Highly useful/desired app" (in objective terms; and in metaphoric terms, the grapes that everyone wants and everyone gets) you can get my point.

As you said correctly, Killer app is personal, that's what I've been saying all along. If Killer App is personally defined, then anything could be a killer app though, but if that's the case then it's pointless to keep discussing.

However, my point is that, if we try to be objective defining what is highly useful (or for games, "highly desireable", regardless of its quality), we could go by the definitions of Killer App found in Urban Dictionary or Wikipedia (which is as objective as we could get, even though these definitions could be skewed) and see if the cases in point (this time it's Infamous) adscribe to the supposed definitions.

I may be speculating by saying that Infamous is unlikely to fit the definitions by looking at Killzone sales, but how likely is Infamous to surpass Killzone if Killzone is the fastest selling first party game according to Sony themselves when KZ2 had the hype and Infamous doesn't?

While I don't really believe that sales make a game or a platform, if we go by these objective definitions, we can see the sales charts to see if there are any significant jumps in sales with no price drops at all. In japan you see these jumps all the time: FF7:CC for PSP, Monster Hunter for PSP, Final Fantasy III or IV or DQ for DS, Yakuza and Resident Evil for PS3 in Japan, MGS4 for PS3 in the US, Halo 3 for 360, JRPGs that have made the 360 jump a bit on the radar of Japan.

That is, if we try to be objective, we can guess which games can be labeled more accurately as killer apps (according to the definitions) when compared to other games, because If we all use our personal definition of Killer App, then there's no point in keeping this discussion alive.

I really don't care if the games I like are killer apps in the general sense, my games are usually killer apps to me. I just want to have a decent discussion and see if anyone agrees that Sony has games with a lot of potential that could reach a higher status as Killer Apps in the minds of a lot more people (instead of just you or me or N4G) for their first party games as the quality is there.

Edit:

"You are confusing a killer app with a console seller and the two are not one and the same. "

Well, according to the definitions (I hate to keep repeating that, I sound like a f***ing librarian):

'...A killer app can substantially increase sales of the platform that it runs on.'

While not explicitly saying it is a need for it to substantially increase the platform's sales, it is definitely a sign of "Killer app" (according to Wikipedia). Of course, it may not raise the platform's sales, but that may be due to the fact that either a very significant amount of consumers already have the platform and so the increase wouldn't be notable (see PCs: They keep selling consistently because people need them, regardless of the cat that YouTube, Google, Facebook, Wikipedia or whatever keep coming out or not, and they're still killer apps; or PS2, which was selling non-stop regardless of if it was getting Killer Apps or not, same with the DS or Wii), or the platform is too expensive for those that still want it (Perhaps the PS3 would see more substantial jumps for every game that in your own definition is a Killer app if the PS3 was cheaper).

"The fact is for legions of PS3 fans such as myself, current owners, inFamous is shaping up to be a Killer App."

And myself too :) Let's hope it is for us at least.

I think you might have the term "killer app" confused with "system seller".

Don't worry though, occasionally even I get confused with all of the different internet nerd slang terms there are, and I'm a huge internet nerd.

I think you mean to say that InFAMOUS isn't a system seller ie. a game that will cause people without PS3s to go out and buy one for.

Everyone else is simply arguing that InFAMOUS will be a killer app/AAA title/awesome game.

Personally I think that InFAMOUS looks like it could be a terrific game and that's all that matters to me.

I also think that it's a bit unfair/ridiculous to be counting on every big budget title to be both totally awesome and have instant 2+ million sales.

It's even worse when people actually dismiss a great game because it doesn't have great sales.

It doesn't bother me for too long though because the more great games there are available for me to play on my system the happier I am.

Just let me add a few things: the only measurable way to know if a great game was a killer app (a desireable app, by the objective definition according to Wikipedia and urban dictionary, not necessarily of subjective aesthetic quality but one that people wants or needs for some reason) may just be its sales and/or the sales of its platform (that would be something that reflects its desireability status, regardless of its quality).

If its platform is selling a lot and the game sells a lot then it is a killer app. If the platform wasn't selling and the game had a noticeable effect on the sales of the platform, then it is a killer app. If the game didn't have marketing but it was great, then it is potentially a killer app but there isn't an objective way to know or measure if it is since the sales were spoiled by lack of marketing (See many SCEI titles).

If the game is great and had marketing but didn't sell a thing, then it's a niche game (See Viewtiful Joe, Okami or Shadow of the colossus, which had some marketing but didn't chart as much as they should have). A crap game that sells a lot, and that may or may not have had an effect on its platform is a killer app (See Wii Sports or Wii Fit).

I'm going to sleep now, I have to work tommorrow. Maybe I should have thought it out better before saying it, or used a term other than "killer game" from a great game to differentiate from a "killer app" that might or might not be a great game. I'll answer tommorrow if anyone wants to keep this discussion, or PM me if you want. I'll sleep on this anyway and I'll re-word my ideas better next-time. Hope I made something clear.

Edit:

@above, whatis:

Thanks for the feedback. I think a killer app is indeed a system seller. Not because I am confused, not because that's my opinion, I looked up the definition of Killer app and it was very consistent with the definitions of System Seller. I do agree though, this internet nerd slang can get confusing sometimes, and inventing new terms can make conversations murkier.

Regardless, I do agree that Infamous will be an Awesome title or "AAA game" in N4G slang, a "personal killer app" if you will but not necessarily in the general sense (I could be wrong though).

Peace, good night

Duh, a system seller is a different thing, but say a killer app WAS something that "sold systems" then it would also be considered a killer app if it made CURRENT owners of said system happy or proud to know they already own the system and can now simply pick up just the game.

In this case Infamous COULD be a killer app without having to sell a single system. Maybe everyone interested in it already have the system because of previous killer apps or knowing of future killer apps and this just sweetens the fact that they own the system already.

I got a PS3 because I already knew what franchises im likely to see on it and because of that you won't see me (and people like me) cause of an increase in the sell of systems when a "killer app" drops, because people like me (and theres a lot of us) already have the system.

A Killer App is a system seller according to Wikipedia. So between your questionable definition and Wikipedia's questionable definition, I'll take Wikipedias.

"A killer application (commonly shortened to killer app), in the jargon of computer programmers and video gamers, has been used to refer to any computer program that is so necessary or desirable that it proves the core value of some larger technology, such as computer hardware like a gaming console, operating system or other software. A killer app can substantially increase sales of the platform that it runs on."

Let's read the last phrase again.

"A killer app can substantially increase sales of the platform that it runs on."

So a killer app CAN be a system seller. So when it isn't a system seller, what does that mean? It only means that the platform is still too expensive, or that the platform has reached market saturation point. Or can you come up with another reason to why a killer app wouldn't be a system seller other than the reasons cited? Because the reason you're citing highly relates with both I cited ("A killer app for PS3 owners that already own a PS3"; well, that means that either PS3 has reached market saturation, is too expensive, or both; or it also means that the game you're talking about is not a killer app according to Wikipedia).

Plain and simple. Notice I'm not being subjective (or at least I'm trying not to be subjective). You're simply *claiming* a killer app is not a system seller, I am proving that a killer app can definitely be a system seller and that only in special circumstances it isn't (but it would be if those special circumstances didn't impede it from being a *proven* system seller; and if it wasn't a system seller, then its killer app status would be hard to prove objectively).

"The word "Killer" in "Killer games" is used to describe how great or well crafted it is according to most people here."

"The word "Killer" in "Killer app", according to the definitions, relate to its usefulness or desireableness."

- Do you honestly see a difference? Aren't "great" things useful and desirable? The word "killer" is used in the same way in both phrases. Now if the "Killer" in killer app referred an app that commits murder, then they would be different. But the "killer" used in both phrases effectively means "awesome". But I appreciate the link to "English lessons" that you provided, anyway.

"A killer app is an application that defines a platform."

"As you said correctly, Killer app is personal, that's what I've been saying all along."

"If its platform is selling a lot and the game sells a lot then it is a killer app."

- I understand what you're trying to say, but I think you're confused. The Wikipedia definition is vague, and you're interpreting things that aren't there. I think what you're trying to say, is that a Killer app is a game that has mass appeal. But if you're going to go that route, it cannot be a personal thing too.

My personal opinion is that a "Killer app" is a great game. If it sells well, that's because of its great-ness. If it sells consoles, that's because of its greatness. But if the masses don't know about a "Killer app" (as will probably be true for inFamous), does that make it any less "Killer"?

The Wikipedia definition says that a killer app is so necessary or valuable that it proves the value of a console. Let's say SEGA manufactures a game console and releases a game on that console tomorrow. Let's say that game makes all current games look terrible and it is the definitive end-all, be-all of gaming. No one could question its superiority. However, Sega didn't have any budget for advertising. So virtually no one new about said console or game, if they did, they would all want it, but they don't. However, to the select few that do know about it, the game and console are completely worth the price of both. So, is this game a killer app? It fits the definition but does not have mass appeal. I think the majority of N4G users would say Yes.

"A killer app can substantially increase sales of the platform that it runs on."

- I won't quote you, but it seems like you're interpreting this statement pretty liberally. You're right, the emphasis is on CAN. The author (whoever he/she may be) did not say "Will", "Most of time", "Almost always", etc. They said it CAN increase sales. This doesn't mean that it should be jumping off the shelves. I'll add a few more reasons to your list: no one knows about it or it appeals to a niche.

The way I interpret the statement is more like: airplanes can crash when traveling from San Antonio to Miami. This doesn't mean that if we hear about a plane crash, we should deduce that it was traveling from San Antonio to Miami. Nor does it mean that planes often crash when flying between those two cities. It's still a plane and it's still a crash even if those cities aren't involved. The use of "can" only means that it's possible. It's an extreme example, I know, but I thought it was effective in demonstrating my point.

Just because a game doesn't sell off the charts, doesn't mean it's not a killer app. I think most would agree that Killzone 2 is a killer app, no matter how it sells.

+Bubbles for the discussion anyway. Sorry for the overlong post.

Second Son was alright but didn't touch the first two games

It felt short and lacking in comparison

Also I really thought Reggie would have made a better protagonist, someone who is anti-conduit as much as him and ends up becoming one would have been interesting to see. I kind of enjoyed his character throughout the game as his development.

why is it right now, the thing I want the most from Sony is to release remasters of inFamous (1,2 & SS), KZ (1,2 & 3), Resistance (RFoM, 2 and 3) and Motorstorm (1,2 & 3)??

Would love a remastered collection on PS5/PC

There are a lot of games that consumers have been asking Playstation for, Playstation won't do it, so a lot of these developers have gone and made it themselves by any means possible such as Kickstarter (e.g. Armed Fantasia, Penny Blood, Ratatan, 100 Heroes, ect...). Developers have even asked if Sony could help them out with porting/remasters some of these older games for Playstation, they said no.

Um...dude like you say that as if nobody bought them....the devs went on to do ghosts after 3 infamous games....3

People ask for new resistance and new infamous at every moment where it makes sense to mention it.

Having a remake of 1 and 2 would be very welcomed I'm sure.

go back to marvel avengers, sounds like more your cup of tea

You know what, now that I think about it.. yeah none of that makes any sense.

Yes to a reboot, absolutely no to Marvel characters in it.

*either a proper equal of a reboot of the original. *

Damn, there needs to be an extension on the Edit feature.

"Either a proper sequel or a reboot of the original"

And people aren't with Cole interacting with cameos from Marvel? Especially with Sony making Spider Man and Wolverine?

Why exactly would that be a bad idea? Especially with the multiverse being a huge deal and all.

Infamous 1-2 collection would be amazing on current generation. God of War 1-2 and PSP games also playable on PS5 Yes please. And last but not least MGS4

There are so many great games which are on PS3. We need them to be remastered and released for current generation.

Killzone 2, I’ll raise a glass to that! 🍺

prototype def was not on the same level as infamous far as gameplay or graphics