Hus said:
youarebadatgames said:
Not having first parties for MS is a good thing, they specialize in building software and APIs. It's a better idea to lay a good foundation and let the third parties be an independent the creative force, rather than trying to purchase a large portfolio of studios and telling them what to do. MS is far superior to Sony on the developer side, which is why outside of Sony's first parties most companies choose MS as the lead console (superior tools, DirectX/XNA, better online integration/support).
The only downside is it leaves studios free to go multiplat, but given that their strategy has shown almost all multiplats to be superior on the 360 in performance and sales, it's paid off pretty well. |
Cute, you got no clue wtf you are posting about.
Actually alot of Sony owned Studios have a great deal of atonomy, only the big Japan and London ones really get told and much of that is psn/home and tool kit development. Might want to look at sales bud many multi plats sale better on PS3 and play better, this is not 2007.
|
http://www.vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?name=&console=PS3&publisher=&genre=&minSales=0&results=50&sort=Total
http://www.vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?name=&console=X360&publisher=&genre=&minSales=0&results=50&sort=Total
lol wut? This is a sales site, it's easy to just look at the charts for multiplats and see most sell better on 360. Funny you don't do anything to dispute the facts too - MS is superior on the development side and the multiplats sell better. The best selling games on PS3 are multiplats, which are all outsold by their 360 counterparts. It's easier to think of the games that sell better on PS3 cause you can probably count them on one hand.
