Uncharted is a November 2007 title. 2007 also saw games like Motorstorm, Warhawk, Heavenly Sword and Ratchet & Clank Future Tools of Destruction. All of them new franchises except for R&C of course. Uncharted Drake's Fortune not being spectacular is just your opinion, I could say the same about that franchise your avatar is about. I didn't see the big deal about Mass Effect after I finished the first game. I thought it was, how should I put it... underdeveloped...but hey, that's my take.

In year 2thousand and 8, the PlayStation 3 got Resistance 2, Little Big Planet, Valkyria Chronicles, a game called METAL GEAR SOLID 4, Motorstorm Pacific Rift, a demo called GRAN TURISMO 5 PROLOGUE, Singstar....

Get your facts straight.... and PlayStation's got its "share of games" ?  "nothing killer yet" ? What am I even discussing here with you when you showed your true colors the moment you started talking. Dude, you haven't played anything, you aren't even a gamer if you disregard the PS3 library like that. You are just a ...how should I put it...an underdeveloped and unenthusiastic fanatic. But there's a popular term for that too.

X-Box 360 launched for $400, and it did fine, I know it's still a difference of $200, but do you really think thats the only reason PS3 sales didn't pick up? I mean PS2's were also selling for several hundred dollars at launch due to limited productions initially, so it wasn't really that different.

I mean you don't think the lack of quality titles in 2007 affected sales? Maybe HD DVD competing with Blu-Ray and Blu-Ray being put onto the market too early? However didn't a lot of people buy a PS3 since it could be used as a cheap Blu-Ray player? I know a few people who bought a PS3 in 2007 for the sole purpose of movies, and still have no games.

Are you really that nieve to beleive that the price was the only reason for it's slow pick up? I mean the 3 big reasons why people buy a PS3 now (In Americas) is Games, Blu-Ray, and Price. Why ignore games near launch?

You have to blaime games at the start. PS3 did not have the initial software linup the PS2 had, and compeditors had a better lineup (360 had Gears of War, Halo 3, Lost Planet, Oblivion (timed), Halo, Bioshock(timed), Mass Effect, Project gotham Racing 3 and 4, Forza Motorsport 2, Dead or Alive 4, Prey, Battlestations: Midway, Condemned, Fight Night Round 3 (timed), GRAW 1-2, Ace Combat 6 and many other exclusives just by the end of 2007. PS3 only had Uncharted, Resistance, Folklore, Warhawk, Virtua Fighter 5 (timed) and Motorstorm by then. I honestly off the top of my head cannot think of any other 8/10 or greater exclusive for PS3 in 2007 or prior.

Also multiplatform games looked noticably better on the 360 then the PS3 back then (look at ProStreet, Madden, Assassin's Creed, CoD 3 & 4, Burnout Paradise, etc) despite PS3 claiming superior power.

Not only was PS3 overpriced, but in 2007 it was an inferior platform, never has a Sony platform been inferior gamewise to it's compeditors, especially at launch.

Now your just being insulting, and sorry I meant 2007, launch of Halo, didn't re-read my post cause I was in a hurry.

By underdeveloped I was specifically thinking about Lair and Heavenly Sword, both games had potential, but due to a really glitchy game, extremely short campaign, and no replay, I really think they were rushed. Resistance was also rushed, but the only thing you lost out on was cinematic cut scenes.

Mass Effect 1 could have used more polishing, I agree, but it was developed by a small developer. I'm not trying to insult PS3, I own one, I'm just saying pre-2008, pre-MGS4, it wasn't that good of a console. A GT game in 2007 or 2008 could have greatly boosted sales, I don't understand how they couldn't make Prologue a proper game and just release GT6 in 2011.

2008, PS3 started to pick up, I say after MGS4 it looked like a proper compeditor to the 360.

Wow I can't say anything negative about PS3 in the forums here, at all. If I said Halo isn't too special I might get one person complain to me, but I critisize Uncharted and the hate floods in. Seriously, I own both a PS3 and a 360, and although I do admittingly play 360 more (mainly because used multiconsole games are cheaper on a 360).

You right there is no sence arguing, I make the reason that PS3 didn't take off because it's library in it's first two fisical years was only passable, and all of a sudden I'm like some idiot.

Seriously, thats what it's like in the forums, I made a good comment about PS3 and you applauded me a couple pages ago, I then say the library is good, but slow in comming, and now you disregard everything I say. I'm sorry man, but I think you have a biased opinion towards PS3, and I say that in the most respectable way possible. It's a good system, but there is a reason it's 3rd in sales, and it's not just because of it's initial cost.

Honestly soo many people here are in love with the PS3, most people here think PS3 has "a much better library" then the 360, but when you actually look up some exclusives, they are roughly the same. Yes PS3 had Heavy Rain, God of War 3, MAG, and Mod Nation Racers, but 360 also had SC Conviction, Alan Wake, Crackdown 2, Metro 2033, among others. This fall its LBP2 and GT5 versus Halo, Fable, and Kinect. It's still roughly the same quality.

Why are people so defensive about the consoles they own, gaming evolves outside of your respective consoles.

Dude, you said in PRESENT tense the PS3 still doesn't have anything "killer", and I quote AGAIN (to save your faulty memory to look a few posts above)  " PS3 has it's share of great games, but nothing killer yet, and it hurts"

You calling ME biased? ROFLMAO , good night my good sir.

I debate a one-track lookout? Have you said one negative comment on PS3 at all in this debate? Every console has it's pros and cons, and all I hear from you is Pro-PS3. I'm giving both positive and negative comments for the PS3, and it's seems every single negative I say you flip out on me for, and start being rude, but when I say something positive, you just give a short congrats. Seriously, PS3 is a good console, but it's 3rd for a reason. The PS3 had a terrible start, It lacked games (unlike PS2), it was really expensive, Blu-Ray wasn't the accepted form of media, it had stronger competition then ever before, and despite being the most graphically powerful console, Gears of War 1 looked better then any PS3 game at the time, and multiconsoles games looked better on the 360.

And yes I think Heavenly Sword was underdeveloped. Either that or it was just a terrible game, which do you prefer me to say?

That last sentance was refering to GT5. PS3 currently has no "mega" franchise, and I think that hurts sales. What did I say that generated such an angry responce for you which involved insulting Mass Effect?

First of all the lack of a "mega" franchise does hurts PS3 total sales. If Uncharted for instance were more polished, had multiplayer, and severly advertized, and still released in 2007 (This is impossible as polishing a game takes time), it would have sold better. Lets say with enough polishing it were hypothetically a "mega" franchise. Well a blockbuster selling, amazing Uncharted would definatly push more consoles then just a good Uncharted.

However it takes time to polish games, thats why GT5 is taking so long. I personally think that if Uncharted was delayed by a year to be polished and advertized heavily (like Halo), it would have boosted PS3 sales significantly. I also think that if GT5 was released in 2008, as a game only 3/4ths as good as GT5 will be this fall, it would have become a very successful game, and pushed consoles, and the current GT5 could then just become GT6 for a 2011 release. I think that could have helped sales.

I thought that last sentance was clear enough on it's own, PS3 does not have a "mega" franchise right now, but if it did, if any one of it's existing games simply sold twice as good as it did (for whatever reason, more polishing, advertizing, etc), I think PS3 sales would have been boosted.

I think the release of a 360 and a Wii forced Sony to release a PS3 pre-maturly. Sony should have been developing PS3 games back in 2003/2004, not 2005. God of War 2 should have been a PS3 game. PS3 simply did not have a very expansive library until 2008 when MGS4 came out.

Maybe an Early GT would have crashed due to a poor PS3 image, but Sony could have had somthing. Microsoft made PGR, and this allowed Forza the time to develop, Sony did make Motorstorm, but I feel that was a bit rushed too. Looking at early PS3 games, I just think Sony came ill prepared to this generation of consoles (Nintendo did too kind of).

michael , try to masquerade your bias all you want and playing the victim after you stealthly trash the PS3 all around, that's just fine and dandy. I "insulted" Mass Effect?  LOL, dude, you see right there, you are screaming Xbox fanboy from all your bodily orificies...c'mon, what are you trying to prove here? nobody can take you seriously after all you've said, what are you doing on this thread anyway, are you on some kind of crusade? give up man, it must be obvious by now this is going nowhere.

Well personally I think Sony came into this generation ill prepared. They made PS3 a Blu-Ray console well before Blu-Ray was the established form of media, they released PS2 exclusives up to 2007, and I think early PS3 exclusives were rushed. Lair was glitchy and short, Heavenly Sword was really short and had no replay, Resistance had no cinematics because Sony wanted it to be a launch title, and Motorstorm, although beautiful and fun, lacked variety in it's race type, tracks, and cars.

So thats 1 reason why I don't beleive Sony has a "mega" franchise. I think "mega" franchises need to establish themselves early within a generation, but the big, well polished PS3 games didn't start comming out until 2008, and even then I think Killzone was the first real shocking PS3 exclusive (to me at least). A lot of the bigger PS3 IP's took time to develop, GT5 still has yet to be released, Killzone 2 wasn't released until 2009, LBP was a 2008 title, and God of War was this year. Except for Uncharted, and Resistance, none of the big PS3 IP's came out until 2008. To be fair Nintendo didn't have much until 2009, but the success of Wii is another issue.

So thats my second reason, my third reason is that Sony has a lot more competition this generation. Were there any "mega" 10 million plus sellers on the Gamecube or X-Box 1? N64 only had a couple itself. PS3 was the first Sony platform with real attractive compeditors. N64, Cube, and X-Box were all great consoles, but they failed to attract the medias attention. PS3 this generation attacted the least attention, and most of it was negative at the start (high price, is blu-ray the future, etc).

My 4th reason is 3 competing shooters, and my 5th reason is that this generation, the PS3 has done soo poorly with respect to past PS consoles (only recently PS3 consoles have started making a profit), that Sony simply has not allowed a budget for a "mega" franchise other then GT5.

I guess thats my proper response to this thread, everything else is just getting off topic.

You only critisized Mass Effect because I critisized Heavenly Sword, and you picked Mass Effect because of my avatar.

I love my 360, there is no doubt about that, but I think the wii is the coolest console around.

Also if I were a fanboy, why would I say good things about PS3 games as well? Why would I own one? Have you made 1 negative comment about PS3? No. I say one negative thing, and you blow it up in my face, why?

You can't take me seriously because even if I say 100 positive comments about the PS3, as long as I say something negative about it, your view of me completly changes.

Am I on a crusade? I gave my reasons why I think PS3 doesn't have a "mega" franchise, and debate with people. Isn't that the topic of this thread? Did you not agree with me when I made a long post essentially saying "PS3 games don't sell as well as Halo, but they are good so who cares?"

Why am I all of a sudden an X-Box fanboy just because I said PS3 didn't have a good lineup in 2007? It didn't, I'm just looking at facts. Why is that relevant? Well it's a possible reason why no "mega" franchises developed. I think most "mega" franchises need to establish themselves early, or simply be well established franchises from past consoles (Hence GT will most likely become a "mega" franchise, despite comming late into PS3's life).

Why is it that no one can say a single negative comment about PS3 without being bashed about it? There are reasons why Sony doesn't have a "mega" franchise, why do I get ridiculed just for mentioning some of them? Thats the prupose of this thread.

Am I on a crusade...man. I say one negative comment on the PS3, and you flip out on me, and critisize a game I love (look at my sig), unwarrentedly, to annoy me. I respectivly say I beleive you have a PS3 bias and you flip out on me more calling me a fanboy, and continuing to insult me. Are you on a crusade do undermine anyone who likes the 360 even the slightest?