PS3 vs. 360 Exclusives for 2009

[Groucho]

EaglesEye379 said:

Groucho said:

Man, I really find the stock definition of "AAA" on this site (90+ critic ratings) distasteful. Its completely meaningless, except from the perspective of a gamer, and often does not correlate with sales, profits, etc.

In the games industry, from the developer and publisher perspective, a title's "AAA" status is defined by its budget.

As far as sales (and IMO this site) should be concerned, "AAA" should be related to profit, profit margins, or at the very least gross income.

Review scores... that's just silly, although as a gamer, I appreciate a scores relevance with regards to artistic impact on the gaming community... but that's pretty subjective, and this is a sales site...

 

 I really find your stock definition of what VGChartz posters should talk about distasteful.

It would truly be a dark day indeed if margins are the ONLY metric for developers and publishers. I find it more and more comforting after reading your post that MS constantly quotes Metacritic scores in their PR now.

I said nothing regarding what posters should talk about.  I have trouble with the label "AAA", since it has several different meanings across the games industry, and "review scores" isn't typically one of them.  I just think trying to guess what games will be rated, this long before their release... is ridiculous.  That, or assuming that games are rated better or worse based upon their genre... ridiculous.

Don't be so defensive -- I'm not trying to police the discussion.  I'm just trying to point it toward something more productive, and less flame-inducing and meaningless.  The topic of upcoming big games has merit, after all.  It would be a shame to turn it into a "this game, which I've never played, and that isn't coming out for a long while, will be better than that one" discussion.