Sony fans, why don't you....

[Michael-5]

pokoko said:
Not sure I understand the reliance on metacritic to decide what is good and what isn't. Review scores at the beginning of a generation are always higher than at the end, even if the games themselves have improved. Just look at Halo.

As far as one game selling more than another, it's apples to oranges when you're dealing with different genres. Perhaps more people simply like hack n' slash than third-person action games, or perhaps one was marketed much better.

Personally, I like Killzone. It's one of the few sci-fi console games with a degree of complexity and originality to it. Most of the rest are straight from decade's old pulp novels. Killzone reminds me a lot of Dune, actually, with the politics, power struggles, and moral uncertainty. There is more to it than meets the eye, which is apparent by the way people still make threads to discuss the story.

Metacritic - That only applies to sequels generally, and it's usually because the first game bring a new experience, and the second brings more of the same.

It's however not always true, XenoBlade Chronicles is one of Wii's highest scoring games, and also one of its last, Half Life and Half Life 2 (released mid-near end of the respecive gen) have a 96 score. Mass Effect 2 scored better then 1 and 3, Zelda and Mario remain relatively consistant at about 9.5, and I bet The Last of Us will score well too.

However metascore isn't everything, just look at the JRPG's. Final Fantasy XIII above Tales of Vesperia/Lost Odyssey?

Sales InFamous is sandbox, like GTA.....it's in a good genre.

Also you're view on Killzone is the exact opposite of mine. I mean take the name, Killzone, it's generic and the plot really isn't that deep. Halo 1 and Half Life however, those were interesting and unique FPS's.

WAIT!!!! NO I DIDN'T COMPARE A PS3 EXCLUSIVE TO ANYTHING NON PS3!!!! DON'T READ THAT (or at least don't flame me to the ground for it)