By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
S.T.A.G.E. on 01 August 2008
Edit Thread
ChronotriggerJM said:
Jereel Hunter said:
ChronotriggerJM said:
mrstickball said:
Could it be that *gasp* American gamers buy a system for...........Games?

The Xbox 360 has plenty of those. Good games too. So that might be the reason. It's not nationalism (after all, no American console has ever been #1).

I highly doubt it's "The Games" that your speaking of considering both consoles have "The Games". It's about image. I'd easily say Mass Effect, Lost Odyssey, and Bioshock EASILY shame Halo 3, but which one caught the image? The games that do insanely well were geared to do so. I don't like Microsoft as a company, but they know how to pull massive strings when it comes to advertising. And they know what to pimp out as well.

 

And like mentioned above, the year head start with word of mouth also really helps. Many people pick up consoles this day in age to play with they're friends. And with the increasing use of online play, it was an attractive console @ the PS3's launch. This day in age however, the value isn't anywhere near as amazing, and were seeing that trend in the sales market, the gap is nowhere near as extreme.

 

 

"Easy shame Halo 3" ? Halo is, and always has been about the multiplayer experience. Most Halo players spend 95%+ of their overall Halo playing time on multi, not the campaign. You listed great games there (especially Mass Effect, which is IMO the greatest new IP of this generation) but they fill different slots. Once I beat Mass Effect the third time, it was time to give it a break. Whereas I can pick up Halo for the occasional Live game with friends and have a blast. A great title combining great replayability(which multiplayer is the #1 factor in) and a convenience social experience deserves plenty of respect.

In my (and MANY pc gamer's) experience, Halo is about as average as you can get when it comes to a FPS. I'm not saying that in a bad way, they just seemed to have watered out the experience so it's enjoyable for everyone. There's no steep learning curve, there's nothing that's genuinely unique to master (headshots are pretty universal :x), and there's nothing really that sets it aside from any other game. It's just a decent game, with several extra buckets of polish. It's nothing spectacularly amazing, and that's right where it should be to cater to such an audience. In my opinion, Unreal Tournament does just about everything Halo 3 does, only they do it "better". They have a more diversified array of weapons, vehicles, maps, audio tracks, and we get mods :P I think it looks better also >_> But it won't have the popularity of Halo, it's too fast for some people, and many can't get a hold of the mods, secondary fires, etc etc. It's just not as accessible. But in my opinion it doesn't mean it's inferior. Just deeper.

 

Unreal is great...but it makes no sense to argue it, when Halo is a console pusher and Unreal isnt. Halo is distinctly different from many shooters. Resistance franchise and KZ2 are (while beautiful games) the most generic shooters ever. The only thing that gives Resistance any hope is that 300 ft monster. KZ2 better be good, because the first game sucked, terribly. Gears of War and Halo are hot, different console sellers, while Resistance and KZ2 would be considered generic shooters trying to even step in the footsteps of those games.