@ Topic:
As CGI said, critical or not, I can't wait to play it!
| EmperorVisari said:
There's quite a lot of multiplats that are not 'core shooters' and sell better on PS3 (RE5, FFXIII or even AC). Show me at least one game (exclusive or multiplat) that sold more than GeOW on 360 and is not a shooter.
|
AC 1 and 2 both sold better on the 360. What was the last RE game on a Microsoft platform? Considering the answer to that question I'd say it did pretty well. Ask the same about FFIII and again I'd say it sold pretty well. To reverse this situation say a big franchise linked to Microsoft were to go multiplat... Let's say... Crimson Skies or Brute Force or MechAssault. I chose these as they are directly comparable to the Final Fantasy and Resident Evil series in which they would be the first iterations of their franchises in this gen. Would you expect them to sell better on the PS3 than the 360? Definitely not as any fanbase they have accumulated is on Microsoft consoles and have more than likely shifted from the Xbox to the Xbox 360. Would PS3 sales be terrible? Granted that the games are great, no they wouldn't be. They just wouldn't be at the same level of sales as the 360 version.
I'm not defending the 360. I'd just like to clarify that the same trends are apparent on both consoles in terms of what games sell a lot.
360: http://vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?console=X360
PS3: http://vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?console=PS3
Look at the top 20 on each console. Most of the top 10 are shooters or implement some moderately used form of shooting mechanic on both consoles. After that things tend to diversify and include more high profile RPGS, sports games and bundled software. It isn't a problem with either console. It's all about the general gaming audience. It's just that these games have mass appeal due to their accessibility to people who don't play games more often and just want to jump in randomly and have fun.
As for Blue Dragon being lackluster in sales that has more to do with the conditions under which it was released. At the time 360 was still a relatively new console (about a year and a half) on the market so it didn't have much market share in comparison to the PS2 which was still JRPG king at the time. Beyond that Microsoft's consoles didn't have (and still don't have) a large amount of support in Japan where the style of game is most appreciated. The PS3 had also released about 6 months before Blue Dragon came out and it was quite a common thought process back then that PS3 would accept the torch as the JRPG machine of choice which again has a direct affect on any 360 exclusive JRPGs. It has nothing to do with the complexity of the game as you'd so boldly claim.
As a counter example I'd like to use Oblivion. Oblivion (despite being watered down in comparison to Morrowind) has a good amount of depth as an RPG and is absolutely massive. Despite releasing a full year before Blue Dragon to a much smaller audience it went on to become one of the best sellers on the 360 (and later on the PS3 as well). Why? Did it lack complexity and depth? I don't think so. It was the mass appeal that the game had.
This post is getting long so I'm going to cut it here. In short, many here from both camps simply want something to be true and ignore the full picture in order to support what they believe. It's quite petty but it isn't going to end. I suppose it's fun for me to come on once in a while and blow out like this.
