This was brought up in another thread and it made me think about it a bit.
At this point, we have reached a new defintion of games. As the # of app or PC ports start to flow into all of the systems, what do we consider a game? Clearly, if you just take the list of games on the PS4, it has the most. If you compare it to a PC, the number doesn't even match what comes to the PC every week. The real problem is that with the influx of indie titles, the standard of making a game that goes to retail for the usual $59 US is now broken. Is that how we determine it? Does the game have to go to retail for $59 or can it just drop into PS+ or XBL for $15? Does it matter if it just cost $5 and it has 15 minutes of playability?
What used to be the burden on gamemakers was that they had to have something that someone would publish for them. So, the game had to make it to some level of quality to get that Spend on it to be distributed. Now, developers can take their 5 yr old game and dial up the graphics and rerelease the HD version. An app developer can port his app over in days or weeks. But, are these considered full on games?
The short answer is, if it plays, it is a game.
So, how do we compare content between systems if the definition is different for each person? Is the game AAA? How do we define what AAA is? What is an indie game? Does a port or HD remake really count?
Sure, this only really matters in the Console Wars end of things, but it does seem to come up in almost every thread.
How do you define what is a game and which system do you think has the most?
DON'T CONFUSE EFFORT WITH PRODUCTIVITY...