S.T.A.G.E. said:
happydolphin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mr Puggsly said:
LivingMetal said:
Mr Puggsly said:
The PS3 gets praise for getting so many exclusives, but it should be noted most of them aren't particularly great and have modest sales. Some of their IPs have even seen a sharp decline.
Ultimately, the 360 has Halo, Gears, Forza, Fable, and Kinect. I personally think that outweighs Sony's line up which is why 360 is still going strong. |
I'm not a fan of shooters, racers, and motion controlled games so the PS3 will have more going for me than the Xbox 360. But in terms on catering to the masses in general, the titles you mention will outweigh the PS3's line up. In fact, Alan Wake and Fable appeal FAR more to me than the other titles you mentioned, but they are nowhere near as financially successful than the titles you mentioned. So sales in not the issue here.
|
There are more good 360 exclusives than the ones I mentioned, but I was more so focusing on titles that push hardware.
Eitherway, the 360 library as a whole has plenty of variety. The exclusives account for a small fraction of overall sales on both HD platforms.
|
The first three years of the 360's life had variety and then it all went down hill after that. it was the same games from that point forward. Shooter, shooter, shooter. I'm also hearing they want another shooter thats like Uncharted 3. Awesome Microsoft, way to think for yourself. :)
|
UC3 came from a decision from sony to MS-ize a middle-aged fantasy game ND was hard at work on. Call it a way to return the favor ;)
(can't find the source, but it was in one of the threads on vgchartz. Lookedmfor it in depth but couldn't find it :S )
|
You're not getting my point. How many shooters did Sony have before that point? I know Uncharted was supposed to be a fantasy game, but Sony saw the western fanfare for shooters and decided to invest in it AS WELL. Microsofts built its name solely off of shooters and Sony has built its name off of having a wealth and variety of titles. Sony may have more shooters, but we all know where they are aiming to get sales from.
|
Okay, I see what you're saying, I just didn't get that from your post. You weren't being very clear o.O
I'd like you to remember that Microsoft had it's own line of sports games once upon a time. You can see it in this list I'm compiling with other vgchartz members.
http://goo.gl/Wz4nr
It was called XSN Sports. And sports games just as an example here. The same applies to many other genres.
In terms of new IPs, how far can you go in certain genres? Racing, sports and the likes depend on bigname franchises, not new IPs! Why reinvent the wheel when someone else is doing it very well? MS leaves it to EA, the bosses of sports games.
But taking a look at a few games Sony provided new IPs for this gen, and you have inFamous, UC, Killzone, LBP, and some others (I hate lists, but need to get better at them). In there you have action-adventure, shooter and platformer. Action-adventure and shooter in this occurence are quite similar since the themes are known to be similar, and that's due to Sony's direction to studios to make their games more nitty gritty. I don't see the variety when it comes to new IPs. And even when it comes to exclusives + multiplats I don't see where you see more variety on PS3 vs 360. Maybe exclusive to exclusive, but even then I don't see it. List wars incoming? Why not just contribute to the shared doc instead and we can extract the lists after the fact?
But even then I don't think we'd be sticking to OP if we did that, since OP is about new IPs, not general variety...if you know what I mean.
