360 in 2008, the year in Preview! (Better than 2007?)

[thekitchensink]

Jandre002 said:

rocketpig said:
Sorry but attach rates don't mean shit. Let's go by numbers... As a console sells more, attach rates drop. That's a fact. As you add more games to a lineup, the attach rate drops due to consumers being given more choice. That's a fact.

No one cares about attach rates, especially the people who actually make the games, and they're the ones who really matter.

I will agree that MS needs to prove to people that some of these non-shooters are worth buying, though. ME and BioShock did very well but many other non-shooters just fade away with crap sales on the 360.

 WHat the attach rate means is that these games are not as huge as people are making them out to be. Bioshock was good, Mass Effect was meh, but people aren't buying the console for the exclusive games line up. Very few people bought the console for either Mass Effect or Bioshock. They bought it for Halo 3, Gears, or because its cheaper than the PS3 with similar games. They bought the 360 to play Rock Band, Guitar Hero, COD4, and Assassins Creed as you can see with software sales. Some of the people who bought those games might have gotten Bioshock and Mass Effect on the side, but that wasnt why they bought a 360

 

So what im saying is that even though Banjo and Fable might be good games, they aren't moving consoles. In fact, the only 2 games in the 360's lineup that will move games are Gears 2 and GTA. Thats my point. I dont care if Sony or Microsoft touts attach rates or not. They might be making money, but thats not the reason the XBox360 WAS outselling the PS3. It was solely Halo 3 and pricing, and bad PS3 sales not good 360 sales.

Thats all changed, and putting games like Too Human, Fable, and Banjo up and saying "HOLY CRAP THIS YEAR WILL BE BETTER THAN LAST!" Thats not true at all. Those games might move 200,000 more consoles combined WW. GT5, MGS4, LBP, RFOM2, KZ2, GTA(PS3). Those are games that will move consoles. Either they are hugely innovative or sequels to popular series. You dont have to like those games, but facts are facts. 

 

 

So, what you're saying is that Fable and Banjo aren't sequels to hugely popular series'?

 

And what's this, that the 360 games will have no innovation or won't be in popular franchises?

 

-Left 4 Dead: Heavily focussed on coop play.  All 4 people MUST work together or you WILL die.  Instead of getting a certain amount of kills, you must fight your way out of a city infested with zombies.  Tell me that's not innovative.

-Splinter Cell: Don't even get me started on this one.  Splinter cell was HUGE last generation, and it's being taken in an entirely new, ENTIRELY INNOVATIVE, direction.  It's like playing the Bourne trilogy.

-Gears of War 2: Sequel to a very popular,  highly innovative shooter.  I hope no more needs to be said about this one.

Those are just a few examples, but you can see, I hope, that it's ridiculously fanboyish to say that the PS3's lineup is better because it has sequels and innovation, and that the 360 does not.  And let's not even get started on the possibilities of XNA.