View Post
Coronalex said:
Profcrab said:
Coronalex said:
I don't think it will make MUCH of a difference.
Sure they will sell well, but the PS3 is at a sweet spot with 299.
If they need to a drop to 250 it will make this a "non issue" as KB would put it.
Plus "It's Official: PS3 Has The Best Library Ever" http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3178474
I think everything will be juuuuuuuuuust fine

Before you go posting that link around too much, consider that Lair is on that list of "Gold" games.  It got a Famitsu score of 34/50 whic is above the 32/50 needed to be on that list.  Remember that Famitsu is a Japanese hype meter.  Their ratings are based, and they have admitted, largely on how much the game is anticipated.  The only reason the Wii is way low on that list is because of all the shovelware.

Also, if you actually read the numbers, Famitsu may have given a greater percentage of PS3 games a "gold" ranking, but they gave more 360 game gold rankings in total number, than they gave PS3 games, 77 PS3 games to 104 360 games.

So, first, Famitsu is a poor measure of game quality.  Second, if you are going to post a link to numbers, make sure you read them first.

I give that post a 9.1.

Wow, even posts are being rated now a days are they ?

This whole fanboy scene has hit a whole nother level.

This argument could be endless, after all, we are going by other peoples opinions.

BUT going by what you are saying, the PS1 is much better than the 360

PS1 (130/2645)

360 (104/240)

Is that right ?

The whole point of this was to say "on average" which ones have a higher rating, not "who has the most".

I would have thought that was obvious... Maybe it's just me


I made no comment as to whether I agreed with the OP in my post.  I simply pointed that the evidence you presented in your post was flawed.  In fact, if you read my earlier post, I said that a 360 slim would not mean mean anything for PS3 sales.  It would likely only keep 360 sales on track, which is good for MS, sure, but it certainly wouldn't be "the end of the PS3".

Also, if you want to bring the PS1 into it, the PS1 was an awesome system.  It had a crapton of games made for it because any bozo who knew C and could program a game for it.  So, it had a ton of useless games, but it also had many very good games and Sony is still riding the legacy of that system.  If you are going to ask me which was a better system for it's time, I would say PS1, hands down.  I have not a single bad thing to say about the PS1.

So, going from that point of view, average rating percentage is rediculous for trying to compare a system.  If you make 4 games for a new system and 3 of them are highly rated, then you are now at a 75% high rating which blows the other systems out of the water.  So, again, the article you posted is useless and proves nothing, just as your fanboy accusation evaporates into thin air when you actually consider what I posted and the previous posts I have made on the topic.

I give that post a 9.2.

Thank god for the disable signatures option.