chocoloco said:
Seece said:
chocoloco said:
Seece said:
chocoloco said:
Seece said:
Tigerlure said:
And Killzone 3 won't?
|
In terms of what?
|
Don't worry we all know Seece only likes Microsoft games, but most people who are fans of first person shooters would play both Halo:Reach and Killzone 3 if they had both systems.
Quality and Quantity will be in both games.
|
? I like LBP and a few PC games, and a few DS and PSP games ta.
I was talking about Quantity, and the sales comparison.
|
I think you confussed more than one person, but yes quanity in sales will topple anything from Sony.
You should realize that killzone would sell tons better if it was a 360 exclusive and any fps fan who owns the system would brag about its graphics and great classes. My main point is why act like there is a differance in quality just because one game sells more than another. Thats like saying McDonalds is better than a five star restaurant. Sometimes sales do not equal quality, don't get me wrong though as I love Halo.
|
I didn't say anything about K3's quality??? I just said Reach will have BOTH, I don't think K3 will have both, I think it will have Quality, but not quantity (in terms of sales) (and I expect Reach to get a higher meta)
L4D is a great franchise, and those have both sold around K3, I wouldn't be so sure it's the PS3 holding back Killzone and not the game/franchise itself ...
|
Some games do have less mass appeal so your example of L4D 1,2 makes sense.
In terms of meta score I often think the top franchises are overrated in order to not piss off the mass following they have. Look at GTA IV a great game, but certainly not worthy of its 98 meta. Halo is the same as nobody wanted to start a internet forum meltdown by giving the game a lower score. People would accuse the site of being biased. So what I'm saying is Killzone does not benifit from the massive following so it is bound to have a lower meta score.
|
That's entirely your opinion.
Never heard of that excuse before, you hear something new and barmy everyday ^^
