By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Aj_habfan said:
starcraft said:
Munkeh111 said:
CaptainPrefrences said:
im seriously considering getting a 360 if resistance 2 sucks for gears 2

Resistance wont suck, don't fear. Insomniac dont make bad games


No Resistance wont suck, but it will be dwarfed by Gears. To my knowledge Insomniac don't have a AAA shooter to their name ever. And they dont have a single AAA game this generation thus far.


I think you are too hung up on this "AAA" label. Resistance recieved about 87% and Racthet 89% on Game rankings last I checked.


Agreed. Who the hell made up the "rule" that AAA means 90% on a certain website, metacritic or whatever? Did starcraft decide that?

AAA means huge A-list games, and connotes both good reviews and great sales and ability to generate mass market appeal for a system (making the difference between MS-level sales in the 30 million console range, and much higher Sony-level sales).

Example in use: PS3 has more AAA titles coming in 2008 than 360 does. And we can say that right now, without reference to f***ing metacritic. Period.


AAA's best definition is strictly about critical success on reviewers and gamers, so +90% is the best way we have to check whether is an AAA or not.

 Then there are games which even though have achieved 90%, there is a vast disappointment or not as good impressions from gamers, then removing the AAA status from those games. The best examples for these are: Halo 2, Oblivion, Metal Gear Solid 2.

Sales or mass market appeal are NOT relevant!! Anyone who says sales are significant is wrong and is trying to use that as an excuse to make their games be AAA.