360 still has a better library than the PS3 IMO, not to mention is cheaper. PS3's library is getting better but still not nearly as many games that I want compared to 360.
Most 360 exclusives are playable on PC and PS3 has both better and more exclusives, which are not playable on a PC. Unless you're a hardcore shooter fan, 360 ceased to have the best library long ago.
So MS needs to make more and better REAL exclusives to get more respect. Open studios, fund new genres.
CGI-Quality said:
Your outlook on things is usually pretty cloesd off IMO, but this is one takes the cake. They offer nothing unique? OK STAGE. |
My outlook isn't closed off at all. My approach is extremely broad. I know what a game company is and what isn't. Show me something that Sony and Microsoft are giving that is unique to the gaming industry save for online and community intergration...which is purely Microsofts dominance and Sony is a format whore company, thats about it. Please show me. Nintendo innovates, makes games and Microsoft and Sony copy this. I know the difference between a company that exists to make games and companies who profit off of booming industries. Sony hires people who love the industry and then they attach a quality control team to it with a Sony stamp. Read the credits of the games.
| Brennan said: Most 360 exclusives are playable on PC and PS3 has both better and more exclusives, which are not playable on a PC. Unless you're a hardcore shooter fan, 360 ceased to have the best library long ago. |
Most of the PS3 exclusives like Uncharted, MGS4, Heavy Rain and GOW3 are epic roller coasters. I play the PS3 to experience these great titles....but I buy the 360 to actually play games.
S.T.A.G.E. said:
This is a very retarded post. You really don't know Americans and assume things just because the PS3 isn't winning in America. |
Actually, I know it since xbox first came out. At launch, there were news articles like, "Finally, an American video game system".
Maybe I'm generalizing, but I remember the launch, and being an American console was important to the people I knew.
S.T.A.G.E. said:
No.....Sony buys first party companies and just puts stamps Sony first party on them. The same goes for Microsoft. Microsoft and Sony aren't offering anything unique. They are offering what is expected. |
if you ignore the whole party they work with the third party, and make a AAA game together, sony does have their developers and they train em.
they is a HUGE difference, that buying the game and doing nothing other that publishing and working with it to make the game better HUUUUUUUUGE.
theprof00 said:
Actually, I know it since xbox first came out. At launch, there were news articles like, "Finally, an American video game system". Maybe I'm generalizing, but I remember the launch, and being an American console was important to the people I knew. |
Probably because the first videogame was created in America and the roots are very strong over here. Not only that, but you are reading from a American media piece which whole heartedly I cannot disagree. America has every right if not more to have a videogame system than everyone, including Japan. Trust me...if the PS3 was $400 from the very beginning.....this gen would've been much more competitive. America loves quality at a good price, hence why the 360 was purchased. We are by no means a nationalistic nation and if we find quality in an outsider product we will buy it over an American one. The American government gives us no incentive to buy an American product over an outsider product.
As for the launch of the American launch of the Xbox vs the PS2, the American sales of the PS2 destroyed that of the Xbox. Why might you ask? I cannot speak for all Americans, but where I live the Xbox was the elitist and tech lovers system, much like how the PS3 is recieved over here. They boasted the graphics and the quality and the PS2's failure rate (which was significantly lower than this gens), but all this came at the cost of a low amount of games as opposed to the competitor who came out earlier. The PS2 sold more than three times that of the Xbox in America and sold the most consoles out of any other country or continent world wide. A lot of PC gamers bought the Xbox as a secondary to their PC's. As you can see...the Xbox has switched roles with the PS3 this gen in terms of approach and appeal but the only difference is it has Sony's emblem slapped on it. People need to take notice to the resembling nature.
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Sony bought alot of games with money and you still respect them. Maybe you should just admit that you don't want to respect Microsoft? |
omg.
CGI-Quality said:
Your outlook on things is not broad. You speak all the time like what you say is the final word, when it isn't. Although nobody innovates as frequently as Nintendo, I'm not going to sit here and act like Microsoft and Sony offer nothing unique. Your belittling is sickening and tells me your not someone to debate with on the issue of fairness. Credit where due, it's not that hard to give. Microsoft really introduced console gaming to a robust online world. Sony brings innovative games that really change how we look at games. To ignore all that is to admit that it doesn't mean much to you, not that it doesn't exist. I'm not going to sit here and needlessly argue over personality traits though, it's inflammatory and off-topic. |
What games has Sony and Microsoft offered to the table? Videogame developers innovate the way new game types look and don't get enough credit. We are in an age where anyone can enter the videogame realm if they have billions of dollars have an logo of value and quality and they can profit off of the gaming industry. I am not a fan of companies, I am a fan of games and I know where the innovation comes from. Nintendo is the only company that makes the games. Sony buys companies, much like Microsoft because they couldn't make a game themselves, nor do they care to. As I said before, there is a difference between existing to create videogames and companies who see profit in investing in the gaming industry. Game developers use technology that companies like Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo create. Nintendo is the only true company that has a true gaming aim and knows exactly what they want, which is why they innovate technology for gaming. Microsoft hires companies to make this technology because they are not a tech company. Sony makes tech, so this is their strong point but most of this tech was never meant for the gaming industry. I am not belittling anything, I am just not afraid to put everything in its place instead of putting it together like it was natural. I learned to do this after taking economics in highschool and havent looked back since since there really was no need. Sony makes tech, Microsoft deals with software/online, Nintendo makes games. All profit off of games but only one lives to make games. If Sony fails in being a gaming competitor (which I doubt it will) it leaves gaming; If Microsoft fails in being a gaming competitor it will leave gaming; If Nintendo fails in being a gaming competitor....they die. The first party companies Microsoft and Sony owned will move on without a second thought, but never forget the games they put out on Sony and Microsoft tech that put the systems on top. Let me show you just how open minded I really am.....I don't even have a Wii but i will be getting one this year and I am more apt to play a PS3 or 360 but I know where the respect truly belongs.
You reckon it's getting no respect?
Well I guess that's the respect it desreves! 
The dude abides 
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
