thats just not true. Sony Worldwide studios are masters of gameplay as well as graphics.

Each and every game has been a revolutionary step in the right direction for bother gameplay and graphics.

The changes to god of war 3 over god of war 2 seem to pack more "content" than most games even have these days. Stop being so blind. You just dont like them thats fine, go to another thread. this isn't a hate thread.

Btw why is MAG there?

Oh it definitely is.

I will have to disagree there. Uncharted 2 was the graphics king and the gameplay and content where top notch. If GoW3 is anything like the first in terms of story/content then your point isnt valid, but we will have to wait and see on that one. Heavy Rain is another game that incorporates everything, which is what these devs are doing when making games for PS3.  I guess FPS might be more your thing though, which is perfectly fine but you dont have to make such crazy claims.

This idea that graphics and gameplay are somehow mutually exclusive has always perplexed me, like the graphics increase in quality and in some people's minds the gameplay must therefore decrease in quality.  It's simply not true, Sony has made or helped make some beautiful games with great gameplay as well.

RFOM 2 -> Backwards over RFOM 1 in both sales and the lack of coop.

Killzone 2 -> No local multi-play (Don't want to sacrafice graphics)

Uncharted 1/2 -> No local coop. (Don't want to sacrafice graphics)

Mario Kart -> Crap loads of coop and 20+M sales.

NSMB -> Ditto.

Halo 3 -> Good coop 10+M sales.

Gears -> Good coop 5+M sales twice.

Wrong direction. As the TVs get bigger the need for local play diminishes? How can this be a forwards step?

Killzone 2 -> Higher latency, funny controls.

Uncharted 2 -> Verges on defining a new description. Ledge shooter vs coridoor. The gameplay window is very narrow in that game which means they can only offer one path through the game due to their streaming tech. Lara Croft was better years ago because it gave you options, it wasn't some silly slow the player down whilst trying to make it look spectacular as you stream in textures for the next scene game...

Infamous -> Funky invered L/R look.

Why is this so bad? All it gets them are some finicky hardcore gamers who probably have all the systems anyway who have absolutely no loyalty to them. Didn't Nintendos fall teach us anything here? In addition to this they are competing in the hardest area of the market with games which cost above usual for this section of the market to create. I say its a bad strategy and I personally wish they would stop whoring the screenshots and gametrailers and start spending more time creating games which will be remembered for their gameplay 2 generations from now rather than graphical fests which fade in a matter of years as better looking games come out.

So more core games with prettier graphics? Seems to be the same heights. New Heights would indicate something unique a new direction, these just seem like the same old song and dance.

Where did you get your info from? How do you know that Uncharted 2 did not have local co-op because it didn't want to sacrifice graphics? 

"Uncharted 2 -> Verges on defining a new description. Ledge shooter vs coridoor. The gameplay window is very narrow in that game which means they can only offer one path through the game due to their streaming tech. Lara Croft was better years ago because it gave you options, it wasn't some silly slow the player down whilst trying to make it look spectacular as you stream in textures for the next scene game..." 

Wow really? Uncharted 2 is incredibly fluid even through intense combat, and I'm sure that if Uncharted 2 was made any different it wouldn't have been praised as such an incredible game. So what if Uncharted doesn't give you any options; It still gave the gamer an amazing experience that tops most hollywood movies. Have you even played the game? 

Uncharted 2 had a lot of ledge climbing to slow the player down so they could stream textures. Its probably the most claustraphobic 'outside' game I have ever seen all in the name of visuals. They didn't give people alternative paths and these sections it seems were reduced to 'climbing by numbers'. They could have had several different paths available but that would have intefered with their streaming engine most likely so they didn't. How many rock faces have just one path to climb up?

Im not saying its a bad game but its frustrating seeing them focus so much on graphics to the expense of other elements and even to the extent that it visibly defines gameplay to suit the technology.

Tops Hollywood movies? Come on! Not even an 80's Arnie flick would be that unbelievable. If it was a movie it'd get less than 45 Metacritic, unless you have some really bad standards for hollywood movies and are talking about topping just the bad ones, well I can grant you that.