Ajescent said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Ajescent said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
BHR-3 said:
"Many of the Xbox 360 exclusives are simple continuations of previous titles"
you can say the same for sony as well god of war'3' socom '4' infamous '2' uncharted '3' kilzone '3' lbp'2' and for this year i think they have tlg which is a franchise from last gen along with twisted metal which is even older and warhawk
the bottom line is this late into a gen its really rare that you'll get exclusives or new IPs, besides there are plenty of big 3rd party releases that both sony and MS owners will enjoy like ME3, maxpayne3, new tombraider, next gta, silent hill, and re6, 3rd party is where its at
im sure MS are saving the new ips and exclusives for next gen |
The difference between Microsoft and Sony is tha the majority of their hit titles are in house. Microsoft at the end of the day relies on another companies IP, third parties and Then three other first party titles in Forza, Fable, Alan Wake. This is a weak staggeringly weak list as those games are not strong enough to carry Microsofts year. Whats the counter plan? Have one strong exclusive per year from the top two exclusive franchises in Gears or Halo. Halo is finished, so Microsofts true weaknesses are showing. Sony has never been as weak and never will be. Microsoft is the only videogame company dependant on third party. People say Microsoft is the new Sega and I find that to be an insult because Sega lived and breathed first party.
|
Well... Halo is coming back for another trilogy so don't count it out yet. Also I'd say Sega had a better first party offering than MS does. or is that just me?
|
I meant Gears (sorry). I've always known Halo would never die. Microsoft needs or else their time in the gaming realm is up. Halo is the major reason people even looked at the original Xbox and continue to look at this one. After all the third party titles are washed up and Gears is overused, which game will they all run to? Halo. I agree that Sega had a far better first party offering and it sickens me when people say Microsoft is Segas successor when Sega was a purely gaming focused company. Microsoft is in this race for the opposite reasoning as Sega was.
|
My assessment of MS' strategy is that they want the living room, now it seems that they can get it through the apps and Kinect route, they don't have to focus so hard on the "actual games" front because 3rd parties can cover that for them.
Seeing as "most gamers" only play COD and FIFA/Madden and that can be gained on the 360 with no extra sweat off their back...They don't have to bother and the fact that all they have to do is announce a new Halo to please the core units then they are happy.
They are in a good place and they don't have to do anything.
And the reason why I'm not keen on investing in a 360 is I came here for the games and sadly if I can get said games on the ps3 and something extra on the side...I can live with that.
|
Sony wants the living room as well. Microsoft saw that Sony found a way to do it and entered the console race. The difference between the two is Sony know she how to do it without leaving gamers behind. Also the PS3 doesnt put Blu Ray before games, integrates the two. 3D doesnt come before games, they integrate the two. I can understand why Microsoft cannot fathom gaming and increasing entertainment value at the same time. Gaming has to become second nature to them. Im sorry to say that hasnt happened yet.
