| RAZurrection said: Past and present. Doesn't matter now, all people will know is that by the end of this gen, if the game is multiplatform it will run better on Xbox consoles (a 10 year truth) , it's all in word of mouth. There's really no logical reason to buy the PS3 version because it's inferior, thus there's really no reason to buy a PS3 for a multiplatform game when it will run better on the cheaper Xbox. Not really, there isn't a PS3 exclusive as "big" as Assassins Creed, GTAIV or CoD4 or CoD: WaW, let alone numerous enough to really make a difference. And there's the crux of problem, people buy 360s for exclusives and multiplatform games, PS3 only for exclusives. Xbox 360 has replaced the PS3 as the "go to" console for HD games, there's no distinction whether it's exclusive or not. PS3 is the console to get for HD games that aren't on 360, which are few. You can only take the PS3 tech so far before it hits the wall, you can't pour a 5 gallon game into 4 gallons of hardware without losing something. Meanwhile Xbox 360 owners can play RE5 at full graphics power and play Gears of War 2, PGR4 and Halo 3.
But you can't play those 360 games on PS3 or a superior copy of RE5, so since the 360 can that makes it 200% worthwhile and at costing haf the price of a PS3, really makes it 400% worthwhile.
Perhaps for you, but then you don't speak for everyone, if you did PS3 exclusives would sell systems, but they don't, not nearly as well as the annual CoD sells Xbox's. The market knows what it wants and most of the time, it isn't exclusive to PS3.
If you have an extremely narrow view, if you look at the broadly - like the market does - Uncharted 2 won't mean **** next to the best version of Madden 2010.
Easy, take every PS3 exclusive currently out. (Retail games only) Arrange them by aggregate review score/sales (sales more favourably) Remove the bottom 50%, they are worthless. The next 40% are forgettable The remaining 10% are the only games that could affect console sales.
|
There are so many things wrong or not on the point with your comments, that I am at loss for words. You mix up game quality and game sales. You mix up my personal example with general considerations.
I brought my own case forth as an example against your assumption that exclusives are a minor part of the PS3 library. In _my_ case the exclusives setup plus the hardware features were what made the 360 100% redundant. That's why I said that it's all a matter of perspectives.
But the multiplatform offer is exactly as strong as the 360's: if you really think that the average customer is going to enter a shop and decide to buy a 360 instead of a PS3 because in the Eurogamer comparison the shadows were better in RE5, you've lost touch with what really pushes sales.
As for what the market wants, I seem to remember that last year the PS3 was outselling the 360 up to the point of the price cut. Playing RE5 "at full power" - this makes me smile - wasn't enticing enough, it seems.
With your 4 gallons example, are you really trying to say that you think that Capcom's multiplatform engine doesn't perform as well on the PS3 because it maxed out the hardware? Instead of, say, because of relying on a subset of the SDK and not optimizing for the strongly parallelized hardware?
I seem to remember that the RE4 port to the PC had really poor lighting. I suppose that the PC hardware couldn't handle the software that the GC could? Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?
And i don't want to go through the list of PS3 exclusives, because you're just plain wrong with your evaluation. In your view if something is not a system seller, then it is "worthless" or "forgettable". Except that for the majority of people no single game will ever be a system seller, but each exclusive addition to the library tips the scale a little or adds mindshare, until they decide to buy.
