Squilliam said:
Rpruett said:
Squilliam said:
Rpruett said:
For a system that has been out a full year longer, you most certainly can play percentages. There is 3 games in (Three years) that are 'exclusive to the 360' with over a 90+ Metacritic. The PS3 currently has 2 in (Two years). With the possibilities of KZ2, God of War III, GT5, Uncharted 2 all looming that number looks to climb and quite possibly surpass the current 360 amount of 3.
Another almost certainty, is that the 360 (Remember with a full year extra under it's belt) has 14 titles 80+ via Meta Critic compared to the PS3 with 12 titles 80+ via Meta Critic. Even assuming only one of the above mentioned titles can achieve a 90+ Meta Critic rating (Tying the 360 at 3).
The remaining three above should achieve easily an 80+ Meta Critic rating. Which again thrusts the favor to the PS3 and gives the PS3 the edge. Considering how many games the 'Average' Video gamer will purchase, it is likely that these gamers will be most likely to be playing games from the 80+/90+ Meta Critic ratings.
Given this. The PS3 has a better array (Albeit very slightly) of exclusive games that you cannot play on any other platform.
The point of this thread may have been to shed light on the fact that the 360 has a large amount of sheer Xbox 360 exclusives, but really all it does is show how big of a disappointment much of that large library is.
|
Bringing the average gamer into this is like yodeling at the swiss alps after a heavy snow-fall. NPD shows that they only have one platform and if they are console gamers it brings the whole PC/360 exclusive list into contention as well. You just raised yourself:
- Gears of War 1.
- Mass Effect.
- Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon.
- Left 4 Dead.
Have a nice day.
P.S You really should make sure that you're talking about the library with yourself as the context, and make that very clear. Otherwise its very rude.
|
You're right they may have one platform. That one platform is usually a PC unfortunately. Which spits in the face of the whole 360 exclusivity idea that this thread was based on. If most people have only one platform. And that one platform is PC. What does this majority of people go out and purchase? A console where they could already play a good majority of it's games on their current setup.
Or go to a different console that provides them games that they can't play anywhere else.
|
The PC only becomes a real gaming platform when you add a reasonable graphics card to it. Lots of devices have browsers for flash based games, its definately not a PC domain. The average new PC buyer owns a laptop and you cannot easy game on those and thats more than 50% of new PC purchases. Add some Mac and low end desktops and you could say that fewer than 10% of new PCs could play an Xbox 360 game to a reasonable standard.
So why are you so desperate to prove the Xbox 360 library suxorz? You feeling insecure huh?
|
Most new PC's are easily well enough equipped to handle a majority of newer titles. Maybe not with 250+ FPS, but certainly well enough to run most games with 30-60 FPS. And why can't you easily game on Laptops? Most Laptop users purchase mice to go along with their purchase.
Why don't Mac's count?
Fewer than 10% of new PC's could play ...say Mass Effect (To a reasonable standard). Is that a scientific number or just some half-baked number in your head to justify your argument? You can run Mass Effect on what is now a 4-5 year old Graphics Card.
Considering that a majority of PC users have upgraded their PC within the past two years. I'm sure the number is far higher than '10%'.
FWIW....These are the minimum requirements for Mass Effect for PC.
Operating System:
Windows XP or Vista
Processor:
2.4+GHZ Intel or 2.0+GHZ AMD
Memory:
1 Gigabyte Ram (XP)
2 Gigabyte Ram (Vista)
Video Card:
NVIDIA GeForce 6 series(6800GT or better)
ATI 1300XT or better (X1550, X1600 Pro and HD2400 are below minimum system requirements)
Hard Drive Space:
12 Gigabytes
Sound Card:
DirectX 9.0c compatible sound card and drivers
