| S.T.A.G.E. said: Microsoft couldnt pay people to put their exclusive games on their consoles. Microsoft stopped majorly producing first party after the third year, not the fourth. The first three years of the 360's life were the only years where MS had semi-adequate first party. Most of their games were second party after that or paid to keep exclusive from Sony. They also ported games from PC to fill the exclusive void. Microsoft needed the lead because they knew Sony would catch up. World wide in Sonys first year with the PS3 they outsold the 360's first year. They were only behind by a year and caught up at the end. Sony dwindled Microsofts lead from a eight million console lead to two million and then MS brought out in the Kinect in 2010. The Kinect saved the Xbox 360's ass for the last two years and then it fell off and in 2013 Sony closed the gap. There was only so long Microsoft can run. They aren't that efficient with first party because their first party isnt great at all. |
I agree with you about paying for 1st party games, but I think MS did provide a good lineup of 1st party published exclusives until 2009 (which is the 4th year).
As for the alligned launch bit, I hate this whole arguement. Yes PS3 outsold the 360 years 1-4, but the 360 outsold the PS3 years 5+. PS3 only outsells the 360 with an alligned launch because the HD console market as a whole grew until 2010 and then began to shrink.
The rest I agree with and as an example Black Tusk was suppose to bring in "the next Halo" experience to the XBO. What are they making now? The next Gears of War.... :-?
What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database 
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results
